AMD Radeon RX 6000 series graphics cards revealed, feature double the performance of the...

Peter Farkas

Posts: 467   +263
Interested in seeing how the software features perform like the new anti-lag, smart access memory, and rage mode.

Having 16GB of VRAM is nice, should be a consideration for those that plan to keep the card long term.

The 6800's pricing appears to be less than ideal. AMD appears to be pricing the 6800 XT to edge out the 3080. I expect the $1,000 6900XT is priced to accommodate for Nvidia price drops. IF it really does match or beat the 3090, it would be a very hard sell to spend $500 - 600 more on a 3090. It would be one thing if the 3090 was actually a titan but it isn't and it doesn't have Titan class performance in professional workloads. It's essentially a 3080 Ti.
I agree the 6800 isn't priced well. Purely based on what I have seen on paper and videos, the 3070 is the better option.
 

Gypsygib

Posts: 89   +79
Interested in seeing how the software features perform like the new anti-lag, smart access memory, and rage mode.

Having 16GB of VRAM is nice, should be a consideration for those that plan to keep the card long term.

The 6800's pricing appears to be less than ideal. AMD appears to be pricing the 6800 XT to edge out the 3080. I expect the $1,000 6900XT is priced to accommodate for Nvidia price drops. IF it really does match or beat the 3090, it would be a very hard sell to spend $500 - 600 more on a 3090. It would be one thing if the 3090 was actually a titan but it isn't and it doesn't have Titan class performance in professional workloads. It's essentially a 3080 Ti.

I agree with you on the 6800 pricing and even feel the 6800XT is priced slightly too high (assuming AMD wanted a Ryzen event), but I suppose from a business sense, if all of the initial cards are going to sell out for the next few months then they should price them as high as possible and just drop prices later on if necessary. But I think they should have cut the VRAM in the 6800 to 10 or 12 and sold it cheaper.
 

quadibloc

Posts: 232   +133
I agree the 6800 isn't priced well. Purely based on what I have seen on paper and videos, the 3070 is the better option.
My perception is the opposite. The 3080 and 3090 have GDDR6x, doubling the actual bandwidth to the video RAM. A larger cache can certainly help improving memory access, but it won't always take the place of actual bandwidth to memory.
So the 6800, up against the 3070, doesn't have this question mark, because they both have GDDR6 - and it has a lot more memory.
So while the 6800 has a slightly higher price, I'm more willing to accept that it's genuinely better than the 3070 than I am with AMD's other two cards compared to their NVIDIA counterparts. The 3090 may cost more, but it has more memory than the 6900, and AMD didn't even try to claim the 6900 could game in 8K.
Not that I think the 3090 is that good a buy, or that 8K gaming is for anyone in his right mind.
 

Edster

Posts: 69   +51
The 6800 does seem overpriced if it was to compete with the 3070, though the 6800 beats the 2080Ti while the 3070 merely matches it so I guess is justified paying a premium.

The 6700s will be the one that competes on price I guess, but there is no roadmap for that at the moment. This still makes the 3070 a very compelling option.
 

Peter Farkas

Posts: 467   +263
My perception is the opposite. The 3080 and 3090 have GDDR6x, doubling the actual bandwidth to the video RAM. A larger cache can certainly help improving memory access, but it won't always take the place of actual bandwidth to memory.
So the 6800, up against the 3070, doesn't have this question mark, because they both have GDDR6 - and it has a lot more memory.
So while the 6800 has a slightly higher price, I'm more willing to accept that it's genuinely better than the 3070 than I am with AMD's other two cards compared to their NVIDIA counterparts. The 3090 may cost more, but it has more memory than the 6900, and AMD didn't even try to claim the 6900 could game in 8K.
Not that I think the 3090 is that good a buy, or that 8K gaming is for anyone in his right mind.
Ok, we won't be able to tell until benchmarks are done and we see how supply is impacting prices.

I am just saying that both were measured against the 2080Ti, and based on the vendor figures both are beating the 2080Ti similarly.
At the same time the MSRP for the 3070 is $499 while the 6800 starts from $579, not to mention the 3070 draws less power.
Purely based on this, the 3070 definitely looks better at the moment, but we will see shortly for ourselves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gdavid65

EdmondRC

Posts: 28   +21
TBH, I don't see any reason to upgrade from my RX 5700 XT yet. I have really been considering getting the RTX 3080 or the RX 6800 XT for 1440p and RT. But AMD barely touched on RT and certainly did not show any benchmarks. On the Nvidia side, the 3080 is capable of playing at least some games at 60 fps with RTX on, but the performance still dips down into the low 40s even if it can maintain a 60 fps average. I think we're still one generation away from RT being more than a nice novelty in games. If I'm proven wrong, I'll purchase one of these two cards, but otherwise, I'm saving up for RTX 40 or AMD 7000.
 

Peter Farkas

Posts: 467   +263
6800 offers double the amount of vram for $79 more
Does that translate into anything meaningful? we need the benchmarks first, but is unlikely to impact FPS in games, not even in 4K I believe between these 2 cards. I could be wrong so lets see Steve's benchmark marathon first.
 

EdmondRC

Posts: 28   +21
The 6800 does seem overpriced if it was to compete with the 3070, though the 6800 beats the 2080Ti while the 3070 merely matches it so I guess is justified paying a premium.

The 6700s will be the one that competes on price I guess, but there is no roadmap for that at the moment. This still makes the 3070 a very compelling option.
The RX 6800 is priced fine compared to the 3070 when you consider it has infinity cache and 16 GB VRAM up against the 3070s 8GB GDDR6 with no infinity cache, and of course it seemingly outperforms the 3070. The VRAM will come in handy in 4K gaming and keep the card relevant @ 4K for longer. Its only when you compare it to the XT that its price doesn't make sense, only $80 more for 12 additional CUs and faster clocks. I think the RX 6800 is geared toward systems with lower powered PSUs. AIBs will charge $100 more for overclocked versions of the XT that won't even come close to the performance gap between the 6800 and 6800 XT, my guess is that the 6800 will end up being reduced to $499 MSRP not long after launch.
 

meric

Posts: 285   +243
Does that translate into anything meaningful? we need the benchmarks first, but is unlikely to impact FPS in games, not even in 4K I believe between these 2 cards. I could be wrong so lets see Steve's benchmark marathon first.
Even if you were right, would you feel safe paying 500 bucks for a card that has 8gb ram in 2020?
 
  • Like
Reactions: fb020997 and Shake

Gmachine

Posts: 20   +32
This is what happens when actual engineers run a tech company. Hard work makes competent professionals, which grows the skills they have, and soon enough, are able to perfect their skills and do remarkable things. I'm waiting on the reviews like everyone else, but I have confidence that Dr Lisa Su and her team can pull this off. They did it with the CPU wars, why not with the GPUs as well!!
 

OptimumSlinky

Posts: 249   +443
There is only ONE TEST I need to see:

Microsoft Flight Simulator in 4K

That’s all.

No benchmarks.

No CS GO.

No old games I don’t play.

If I can see 60FPS in MSFS then DCS WORLD will run even better.
FS2020 is entirely CPU-bound, so it's largely irrelevant right now.

And many of those "old games you don't play" are the most popular titles in the world right now, so they're showing people benchmarks in what they play currently.

The world doesn't revolve around you, believe it or not.
 

Irata

Posts: 981   +1,445
TechSpot Elite
Even if you were right, would you feel safe paying 500 bucks for a card that has 8gb ram in 2020?
That. The extra RAM may or may not make a difference, but it gives peace of mind.
Am also a bit curious how the smart access memory works, I.e. if that can somehow take advantage of the extra memory.
Either way, if performance is in line with AMD‘s claims, you get an extra bit of performance for a somewhat higher price, so the choice depends on personal preference on performance vs cost.
 

OptimumSlinky

Posts: 249   +443
The 3080 and 3090 have GDDR6x, doubling the actual bandwidth to the video RAM. A larger cache can certainly help improving memory access, but it won't always take the place of actual bandwidth to memory.
Cache will ALWAYS outperform even the fastest memory. Always, by a significant margin. Using cache to reduce communication between the CUs and the RAM is actually brilliant, and I'm amazed it's taken this long for someone to try it.
 

Irata

Posts: 981   +1,445
TechSpot Elite
Cache will ALWAYS outperform even the fastest memory. Always, by a significant margin. Using cache to reduce communication between the CUs and the RAM is actually brilliant, and I'm amazed it's taken this long for someone to try it.
Isn‘t it also much more power efficient vs going to memory ?
 

kiwigraeme

Posts: 160   +116
I've said it before - I think the next few years are going to be interesting .
With MS -with it's DX12 - xbox series , plus PS5 - that's some big guns going in AMDs way. All the performance gains being elked out will flow on to us .
The PS5 pro and Xbox series pro in a couple of years will be a big boost -add in 2Tb of memory - and possibly new AMD Ryzen chips with GPU advantages . A lot more software will be made to boost this Architecture . ie optimize for consoles - port to PC - surely that's again for AMD.
AMD knows about folks complaining about drivers - Hopefully in the coming years - AMD cards will be more optimize from day 1 .

Anyway like others - I really surprised - I think they must be getting good input from other companies.

 
  • Like
Reactions: TempleOrion

ZackL04

Posts: 700   +486
Even if you were right, would you feel safe paying 500 bucks for a card that has 8gb ram in 2020?
Seeing how well the 1060 3gb has fared, I would say yes. Pretty sure Nvidia is more efficient with how it uses available vram.
 

tellmewhy

Posts: 48   +16
I think AMD should make as soon as possible a Vulcan (win7 is not dead) state of the art game engine (with a nice name ex Lisa), heavy optimized for AMD graphics cards, under Boost license and give it to game developers.

Because right now almost all game developers they think and spend work hours only to optimize for NVIDIA because it has 80+% of the market... ✨
 
Last edited:

ruddevil

Posts: 25   +43
AMD has done another favour to customers. With that $999 RX6900 XT pricing, we can see the end of scalpers jacking up 3080 prices.

Well, hopefully AMD has enough of those in stock come November.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peter Farkas

Mr Majestyk

Posts: 500   +419
6800 is a 3070 competitor and wants $80 more. Sure it has 16GB but AMD IMO can't charge more given it's no faster than the 3070 and will have weaker RT performance. Disappointing it's only 60CU's not the 64CU's most thought it would be. I'll be grabbing the 6800XT for sure, better value IMO.