Nobina
Posts: 4,499 +5,491
Make them availible for a decent price and I'll get one. Don't care about meme tracing.
It's true but Videocardz actually show the benchmark where the 3090 was superior than the 3090ti in the same chart very believable stuff.Oh boy, nvdrones will be out in full force after this one.
You’re wasting your time. These people will never accept the truth that GeForce absolutely humiliates Radeon on features. They are fanboys, they are emotionally attached to AMD. There is no point attempting to rationalise with them.Ok, nice word salad and a hot take there. But still not a game feature.
What exactly is AMD’s version of ray tracing? And how is it easier to implement?
You must mean something other than DXR or VulkanRT. I mean, everybody knows AMD cards are not competitive there, right?
I guess you mean FSR? It doesn’t have a temporal component so it is of course barely comparable. And runs on Nvidia cards. I mean, if you’d want to.
I wouldn’t care to guess what you mean by that. Sounds like hand waving.
Yawn? The 6950X in the test was a reference model with pre-release drivers and scored 22209...
Higher resolutions? nVidia couldn't even be bothered to put more than 12gb of VRAM on their 3080ti and they're charging $1200 for it. I also don't know if you've seen the new unreal engine demo, but ray tracing is going to be irrelevant soon. Ray tracing was a cool gimmik for like 4 years that no one could run anyway, DLSS or not. If I'm paying $1000+ for a graphics card I don't want to play at 1080p with DLSS and still get 40FPS with my "gsync"
What??? I'm sure you lived under a rock since both companies released these cards last time I checked both companies have cards that compete very well with each other. Yea ray tracing is in Nvidia's favor but Nvidia is on their second release of this and AMD is on their first release of ray tracing and even then AMD pretty much matches Nvidia's first gen release of RT so not to bad. Besides that there are way more people out there not willing to give up FPS just to have some extra pretty lights and shadows and what not added to their games.Radeon 6000 series is not really a match for the Nvidia 30xx parts. Sure at frames per dollar they compete when you strip away games to their bare bones but in terms of features and driver support the Geforce solutions reign supreme.
Get ready. I have said things very similar to that and, let's just say it didn't go over well. What I have said is that I give the 6000 series an A in RT and Nvidia a B-. And I said that is because even though this is Nvidia 2nd round, they didn't do near as well as was predicted leading up to the 3000 series.Yea ray tracing is in Nvidia's favor but Nvidia is on their second release of this and AMD is on their first release of ray tracing and even then AMD pretty much matches Nvidia's first gen release of RT so not to bad.
So the very essence of grading on a scale. Well this certainly explains how a lot of people justify defending AMD’s poor copies of other people’s innovations.Get ready. I have said things very similar to that and, let's just say it didn't go over well. What I have said is that I give the 6000 series an A in RT and Nvidia a B-. And I said that is because even though this is Nvidia 2nd round, they didn't do near as well as was predicted leading up to the 3000 series.
I also said I would give the Radeons a reduced score if they don't do any better in their 2ud Gen at RT than Nvidia did, but few wanted to hear it.
Yea it seems a lot people are just don't want to hear anything that is not the same as their own opinion these days and god forbid someone has an opinion of their own. With AMD matching and maybe slightly better than NV's first gen RT I say good effort on AMD's part being RT was not really their goal with the RDNA2 cards in the first place and was added in late in the dev cycle.Get ready. I have said things very similar to that and, let's just say it didn't go over well. What I have said is that I give the 6000 series an A in RT and Nvidia a B-. And I said that is because even though this is Nvidia 2nd round, they didn't do near as well as was predicted leading up to the 3000 series.
I also said I would give the Radeons a reduced score if they don't do any better in their 2ud Gen at RT than Nvidia did, but few wanted to hear it.
Here is the problem, man. People base opinions on experience and not hearsay. Your defense of a company borders on the fanatical and has already crossed into propaganda. I know you don't believe everything you are shoveling but the thing is, neither are the people that know better.So the very essence of grading on a scale. Well this certainly explains how a lot of people justify defending AMD’s poor copies of other people’s innovations.
AMD barely matching Turing, which not coincidentally got a lot of undeserved flak at the time, is now an A for effort. Too funny.
The opinions do not seem to be shaped by experience or technical considerations as much as by certain preconceived notions, though. This argument that AMD should be judged in context rather than solely on merit is a good case in point, and one that is quite common in the AMD underdog hive mind that is so vocal on this site.Here is the problem, man. People base opinions on experience and not hearsay. Your defense of a company borders on the fanatical and has already crossed into propaganda. I know you don't believe everything you are shoveling but the thing is, neither are the people that know better.
And that is your problem. You are the one still claiming a lack of features and even more ridiculous, long ago driver problems.The opinions do not seem to be shaped by experience or technical considerations as much as by certain preconceived notions, though.
You being a fan of rendering tech is fine, but it is overshadowed by the way you act like Nvidia is your mommy. And you completely ignore that the Radeons are every bit as fast as their Nvidia counterpart and even cost less. One of the other Nvidia zealots even went so far as to say they "reign supreme" which they obviously do not.As for fanaticism, I’m surely passionate about rendering technology
I feel you should not expect 20% increase in performance. The reason for these significant bump in performance number is because of the skewed benchmarking method in 3D Mark. Clearly the use of the 58003DX benefited the numbers greatly since 3D Mark generally runs a "physics" test in their bench. So just by having a better processor is enough to impact the numbers, despite using the same GPU. So the numbers you see in 3D Mark generally have little bearings in real life usage where anything above 1440p is mostly GPU bound, and having a very fast CPU will not make a meaningful improvement in performance. That is why I will not use 3D Mark to gauge performance because it is that bad and irrelevant. The whole idea of the 3D Mark "benchmark" is more to make you upgrade your hardware often because it gives you the sense that its slower than others using the same GPU, so people will go out and upgrade their system. But in games, you are highly unlikely to see that same kind of performance increase in games. The same applies to their SSD benchmark that have very little bearing on gaming if you actually consider the tests in the bench. I've just looked at what's being tested and I've never bothered to run it since it is a waste of power and time.How legit are these leaks? This implies the 6950 is 20% faster than the 6900 which would be wild.