News RTX 4060 and RTX 4060 Ti adoption rates explode among gamers — mid-range Ada GPUs gain ground in latest Steam hardware survey

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Why some one buy a Nvidia card? Power draw, heat and nvidia gimmick.
Looking all forums to see if AMD fix the high power idle with two monitors or just using youtube.. and what I see 40w to 100w...
40w it's a computer 100w you can game with a 4060ti. But with amd you can't
Right now i'am looking for a 4070 super. Because the 7900gre can be a nightmare or a dream!
 
logainofhades said:
Nvidia's high market share is proof they are just simply better at marketing than AMD. If the average person did an ounce of research, they wouldn't be buying 4060's and 4060ti's.
Click to expand...

I disagree. The RX 7700XT may be equally fast in ray tracing and a little faster in rasterization at 1920x1080, but it's also equal in price to the 4060 Ti. Excluding any specific features for either company, If people are already nVidia users, and especially if they've had negative experiences with AMD in the past (especially related to their software), they don't have any reason to not choose a 4060 Ti over a 7700XT no matter if AMD spends millions in marketing partnerships. Now if they charged 25% less for equal or higher performance the way they used to, then they'd see some growth.

YYahUkh3CZ8S8RqJ5JoFdm-1200-80.png.webp

4B33QdNS78GxoAvhsQvf9m-1200-80.png.webp
 
  • Like
Reactions: thesyndrome
JamesDax65 said:
lmao. Imagine passing over the RX 7800 XT for a 4060/ti. I guess when you don't know any better you by Nvidia. smdh
Click to expand...

Part of Nvidia's popularity claim is their drivers.

AMD's drivers on Linux are far, far superior but that's not how it is on the Windows side. You would think they would've learned their lesson after all these years that its software that drives the PCIe card. This was even an issue back when. ATi also used to also have driver issues in Windows.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: umeng2002_2
I think AMD's driver "issues" stem from them not doing any marketing pushes regarding their drivers. They've never really been able to shake the position they were in around the ATI acquisition time even though the drivers are nothing like that now.

It probably goes back further, (I never seriously considered AMD when I was in the market for a card so I never investigated) but AMD's drivers have really been no worse than nvidia's since RDNA. They've both had random problems here and there, but the worst thing I can think of was launching the driver with the anti-lag hook which could be used in unsupported titles and led to bans. AMD has less driver overhead (at least of last HUB testing) which can allow for better performance when limited by a slow CPU.
 
  • Like
Reactions: artk2219
Alvar Miles Udell said:
I disagree. The RX 7700XT may be equally fast in ray tracing and a little faster in rasterization at 1920x1080, but it's also equal in price to the 4060 Ti. Excluding any specific features for either company, If people are already nVidia users, and especially if they've had negative experiences with AMD in the past (especially related to their software), they don't have any reason to not choose a 4060 Ti over a 7700XT no matter if AMD spends millions in marketing partnerships. Now if they charged 25% less for equal or higher performance the way they used to, then they'd see some growth.

YYahUkh3CZ8S8RqJ5JoFdm-1200-80.png.webp

4B33QdNS78GxoAvhsQvf9m-1200-80.png.webp
Click to expand...

Equal in price to a 4060ti 8gb that will become irrelevant sooner than a 7700xt due to the extra vram. You can still find 6800xt for same price as a 4060ti 16gb.

PCPartPicker Part List
Video Card: XFX Speedster SWFT 210 Core Radeon RX 7700 XT 12 GB Video Card ($379.99 @ Newegg Sellers)
Video Card: MSI VENTUS 2X BLACK OC GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB Video Card ($374.99 @ MSI)
Video Card: ASRock Phantom Gaming D OC Radeon RX 6800 XT 16 GB Video Card ($429.99 @ Amazon)
Video Card: MSI VENTUS 2X BLACK OC GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB Video Card ($429.99 @ Amazon)
 
  • Like
Reactions: artk2219
logainofhades said:
Equal in price to a 4060ti 8gb that will become irrelevant sooner than a 7700xt due to the extra vram. You can still find 6800xt for same price as a 4060ti 16gb.

PCPartPicker Part List
Video Card: XFX Speedster SWFT 210 Core Radeon RX 7700 XT 12 GB Video Card ($379.99 @ Newegg Sellers)
Video Card: MSI VENTUS 2X BLACK OC GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB Video Card ($374.99 @ MSI)
Video Card: ASRock Phantom Gaming D OC Radeon RX 6800 XT 16 GB Video Card ($429.99 @ Amazon)
Video Card: MSI VENTUS 2X BLACK OC GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB Video Card ($429.99 @ Amazon)
Click to expand...

Possibly, but people buying entry level gaming cards like these aren't pushing 4K120 max details, they're not even 1920x1080 max detail cards, so the RAM limitation isn't that big of a deal. Also given the speed at which GPU power and GPU power demand is increasing I see GPU power becoming an issue before VRAM does.

Personally I have my eye on a 4070 Super as it's up to twice as fast as my 2070 super even though it only has 12GB VRAM.
 
Alvar Miles Udell said:
Possibly, but people buying entry level gaming cards like these aren't pushing 4K120 max details, they're not even 1920x1080 max detail cards, so the RAM limitation isn't that big of a deal. Also given the speed at which GPU power and GPU power demand is increasing I see GPU power becoming an issue before VRAM does.
Click to expand...
Maybe it's just me, but if I'm spending $375-430 you can sure bet I'm expecting max details at 1080p. Realistically speaking these cards are decent at 1440p as well which just moves things further as far as potential VRAM issues are concerned.
 
  • Like
Reactions: artk2219
It's so close to the 5000 series release now (6 months or so for the full range?), that unless they are heavily discounted I'd pass on the 4000 anything right now (unless you need it). Depending on pricing, the RTX 5070 is likely what I'll be targeting to replace my 2019 RTX 2060, especially if they do 8GB on the 5060 (which I fully expect will happen because nVidia) like they did for the 4060. If I can get 5+ years out of it, the premium should be worth it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: umeng2002_2
Amdlova said:
Why some one buy a Nvidia card? Power draw, heat and nvidia gimmick.
Looking all forums to see if AMD fix the high power idle with two monitors or just using youtube.. and what I see 40w to 100w...
40w it's a computer 100w you can game with a 4060ti. But with amd you can't
Right now i'am looking for a 4070 super. Because the 7900gre can be a nightmare or a dream!
Click to expand...
After a lot of deliberating, I changed from a 1080ti to a 7900XT - my first AMD card for 15 years - as I'm not impressed by team green's price gouging over past years. For raster performance (I've no interest in RT, I've yet to see a compelling use of it at all), it spanks it's nvidia price-competitor, has plenty of RAM to deal with future load and it's very quiet. It's been a brilliant upgrade - I'm really pleased I bought it.

I do see the high idle on 3 monitors, but not two (1x 1440p @ 75hz and 1x 1440p @ 85hz on desktop). It does annoy me, so I disable the third monitor (1200p @ 60hz) when I don't need it. It's a rare-use case for me so it's no biggie, but slightly irritating I guess.
 
I'd like to see how many people filled the surved compared to active users in september. The survey is voluntary, so I wouldn't really take it as a fact value.
 
kyzarvs said:
After a lot of deliberating, I changed from a 1080ti to a 7900XT - my first AMD card for 15 years - as I'm not impressed by team green's price gouging over past years. For raster performance (I've no interest in RT, I've yet to see a compelling use of it at all), it spanks it's nvidia price-competitor, has plenty of RAM to deal with future load and it's very quiet. It's been a brilliant upgrade - I'm really pleased I bought it.

I do see the high idle on 3 monitors, but not two (1x 1440p @ 75hz and 1x 1440p @ 85hz on desktop). It does annoy me, so I disable the third monitor (1200p @ 60hz) when I don't need it. It's a rare-use case for me so it's no biggie, but slightly irritating I guess.
Click to expand...

The problem goes with high refresh rates. My dead 6700xt from 120hz to 145 hz goes from 12w to 40w... with de ex 4060ti 16gb from 10w to 30w... but what I see in many forums the gre can achieve 100w! That's crazy it's my monitor, sound and my computer. AMD made a big mistake on these chips and don't tell the truth.
 
Alvar Miles Udell said:
Possibly, but people buying entry level gaming cards like these aren't pushing 4K120 max details, they're not even 1920x1080 max detail cards, so the RAM limitation isn't that big of a deal. Also given the speed at which GPU power and GPU power demand is increasing I see GPU power becoming an issue before VRAM does.

Personally I have my eye on a 4070 Super as it's up to twice as fast as my 2070 super even though it only has 12GB VRAM.
Click to expand...

Even at 1080p 8gb can become an issue, and it's only going to get worse.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dx4En-2PzOU
 
JamesDax65 said:
lmao. Imagine passing over the RX 7800 XT for a 4060/ti. I guess when you don't know any better you by Nvidia. smdh
Click to expand...
Yup, my thinking as well. 7800 XT over 4060 Ti and 6700/6750 XT over 4060.(7700 XT if you have to have the latest or can't find 6750 XT). No, greenies will say "you only care about raster fps" and that's not true, but I WILL say that RT isn't practical at this GPU tier, and while nVidia drivers are more stable and DLSS has always remained ahead of FSR, AMD has been closing the gap.

I had a GTX 1080 before my current card. ~$530, just before crypto boom fortunately. Seeing a 128-bit memory bus nVidia card tickle $500 is just wrong in every way. I realize today's street pricing is much more reasonable than launch MSRP, otherwise the headline of this article wouldn't be as true, lol.
 
logainofhades said:
Even at 1080p 8gb can become an issue, and it's only going to get worse.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dx4En-2PzOU
Click to expand...

That's an issue with ultra settings setting unrealistic texture sizes that bloat up memory combined with modern engines using all available memory as texture cache. Objects in VRAM aren't evicted until there is no more room, even if the object isn't being used.

Total VRAM used is about as accurate as Windows total memory used.
 
thestryker said:
I think AMD's driver "issues" stem from them not doing any marketing pushes regarding their drivers. They've never really been able to shake the position they were in around the ATI acquisition time even though the drivers are nothing like that now.

It probably goes back further, (I never seriously considered AMD when I was in the market for a card so I never investigated) but AMD's drivers have really been no worse than nvidia's since RDNA. They've both had random problems here and there, but the worst thing I can think of was launching the driver with the anti-lag hook which could be used in unsupported titles and led to bans. AMD has less driver overhead (at least of last HUB testing) which can allow for better performance when limited by a slow CPU.
Click to expand...
Nah man, there are tens of problems with AMD drivers. First of all, in order to make sure they are installed properly you need to....disconnect from the internet and do a clean install every single time. Second of all, there are games (mostly old ones) that just don't work at all on AMD gpus. At all. Third of all, on laptops, if you actually install the full package (which means adrenaline software) the drivers wakes up the dGPU constantly while you are idling on the desktop leading to very bad battery life. Fourth, if you wanna use it as a desktop replacement, turning off the iGPU and running off of the dGPU, it works fine in games but anything that's not a game (ie. the desktop) has unusable amounts of stuttering. Literally unusable, you can't even open a browser, it's bad.

I can keep on going but those are some serious ones off the top of my head.
 
Amdlova said:
The problem goes with high refresh rates. My dead 6700xt from 120hz to 145 hz goes from 12w to 40w... with de ex 4060ti 16gb from 10w to 30w... but what I see in many forums the gre can achieve 100w! That's crazy it's my monitor, sound and my computer. AMD made a big mistake on these chips and don't tell the truth.
Click to expand...
I'm running 2x 1440p @ 85 and 75hz. My board is running right now at 33w.

I'm sorry - I genuinely don't see that as a problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom