GeForce RTX 3070 Ti vs. Radeon RX 6800: 52 Game Benchmark

Puiu

Posts: 5,958   +5,004
TechSpot Elite
And now we have new NVidia drivers too that boost DX12 performance for a lot of games on the RTX cards (even the rtx 20x0 models)...
The new Nvidia drivers are mostly just a few games that got a small boost, nothing like the numbers they mentioned. (and people are report weird bugs and glitches)

Cyberpunk and Fortza seem to be the only standout titles (Fortza got resizable bar support). The rest are margin of error results (1-2%) and people have reported even small regressions in some titles. In some configs Cyberpunk lost a few FPS at 4K :) (maybe a bug?)
 

Revolution 11

Posts: 235   +329
Ray tracing is amazing in person on a lot of games. Yeah not all of them implement it well, but anyone that claims RT doesn't make a game like Cyberpunk look way more amazing is lying to themselves about it or straight up lying about seeing it in person.

RT is compelling enough that I pretty much wouldn't consider anything but a 40 series card at this point.
Yes, RT in Cyberpunk makes the game look a lot better (1) at night, (2) when it rains, (3) when there is neon light drenching the streets. In daytime in the sun, not so impressive.

Is that worth spending an extra $500 to $1000 for the substantial but not universally applicable graphical privilege in a single game? Hell no.

Because it is always better to increase resolution and texture quality and more FPS instead of enabling RT for the same budget since these quality improvements are universally relevant in the entire game. If you are already at 4K and max quality settings and a high FPS, RT is worth it in Cyberpunk.

But then you basically need a 4090.
 

Revolution 11

Posts: 235   +329
Even then, it will never be the game-changer that tessellation was. Most people in FPS games are focused on enemies, not how pretty everything is. It's the design that makes something beautiful, not the lighting. A good case-in-point would be the Duchy of Toussaint in The Witcher III.
I will say that lighting is actually quite important for graphics but that does not mean you need RT for good lighting. Having good light sources, well-constructed shadow maps, and a complementary art style and decent environmental assets gets you 80-85% of the way there. I remember the Thief 3 and Splinter Cell Chaos Theory having great lighting for ancient 2003-era games.
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 3,365   +4,373
I will say that lighting is actually quite important for graphics but that does not mean you need RT for good lighting. Having good light sources, well-constructed shadow maps, and a complementary art style and decent environmental assets gets you 80-85% of the way there. I remember the Thief 3 and Splinter Cell Chaos Theory having great lighting for ancient 2003-era games.
Even then, in a first-person shooter (the most popular game style today), you're not looking at the lighting, reflections or shadows. In fact, whenever I wanted an frame rate increase, the first thing that I always did was lower shadow quality because they made little to no difference in my gaming experience. I wasn't looking for shadows (or reflections for that matter), I was looking for enemies.

N64's Goldeneye 007 is objectively garbage from a modern graphics perspective but it's still one of the greatest FPS games ever made. It's proof that all the fancy graphics in the world aren't what make a game good and immersive.
 

NeoMorpheus

Posts: 1,502   +3,248
I am really confused.....

RTX3070ti = $619

RX 6800 = $519
RX 6800xt = $539
RX 6900xt = $669 <--

What muppet would buy a 3070ti, 3080, 3080ti or even a rtx3090... when they can have a faster card for $669...?

Consider Warzone and Warzone 2.0 as the test bed for GPU & Monitor sales.
How dare you to think logically, instead of blindly following the Jensen cult of rabid nvidia fanbois church!?

I get that Steve started working on this a little while ago, but yes, more and more, this video and article has become a black eye in HU objectivity.

This blind loyalty to nvidia from the media really needs to stop and go back to really more objective reviews and less fomenting of stupid (currently) gimmicks like RT.
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 3,365   +4,373
What muppet would buy a 3070ti, 3080, 3080ti or even a rtx3090... when they can have a faster card for $669...?
The GREEN one of course! :laughing:
maxresdefault.jpg
 

ron baer

Posts: 62   +18
A lot of simping going on here in the article and comments for the 3070TI when if you look at similar articles favoring the Nvidia card there was bashing of AMD for not besting the Nvidia while being cheaper yet here the Nvidia is slower and more expensive and they get kid gloves with ray tracing being the ONLY argument to go 3070TI over the 6800
 

NeoMorpheus

Posts: 1,502   +3,248
A lot of simping going on here in the article and comments for the 3070TI when if you look at similar articles favoring the Nvidia card there was bashing of AMD for not besting the Nvidia while being cheaper yet here the Nvidia is slower and more expensive and they get kid gloves with ray tracing being the ONLY argument to go 3070TI over the 6800
Welcome to the new normal.

AMD keeps getting a raw deal and Nvidia gets the finest cookies and milk.
 

Steezus

Posts: 15   +9
N64's Goldeneye 007 is objectively garbage from a modern graphics perspective but it's still one of the greatest FPS games ever made. It's proof that all the fancy graphics in the world aren't what make a game good and immersive.

This is not true at all. Have you played the game recently? It was the GOAT when it was newer and I played the hell out of it. In 2004 I deployed to Iraq and with nothing to do someone had sent over a big screen tv, N64 and Goldeneye. I was so stoked and there were plenty of people to play.

I had already been playing CS, CoD and MoH a lot before deploying. When we fired up Goldeneye, the magic of that game---in 2004---was completely gone. It was not even fun to play anymore. We played for a few days before we found pirated copies of CoD and MoH on a shared drive then our entire squadron was addicted to those games like crack. No one played Goldeneye after the first few days of trying to enjoy it again.

So game play is always the most important thing, but making things look even more realistic also adds a lot to the game. Goldeneye has been fully surpassed over 20 years ago by other games in both game play and graphics.

I just hate it when people like to justify their low tier hardware purchases because they think they are more pure because somehow if a game has great graphics then it means it came at the cost of game play. That is completely false.
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 3,365   +4,373
This is not true at all. Have you played the game recently?
You did in fact read that I said "from a modern graphics perspective", right? I play the hell out of that game on an emulator all the time! I even have some third-party graphics upgrades for the game (de-interlacing does wonders) but if you think that it's not garbage from a graphics perspective, compare it to Far Cry 6 or Assassin's Creed: Odyssey.
It was the GOAT when it was newer and I played the hell out of it.
Yes, when it was newer, it was amazing (It was never the GOAT to me though) and I do still play it. I specifically love doing the Facility and Bunker 2 levels using only mines. My favourite level overall though, is Caverns.
In 2004 I deployed to Iraq and with nothing to do someone had sent over a big screen tv, N64 and Goldeneye. I was so stoked and there were plenty of people to play.

I had already been playing CS, CoD and MoH a lot before deploying. When we fired up Goldeneye, the magic of that game---in 2004---was completely gone. It was not even fun to play anymore. We played for a few days before we found pirated copies of CoD and MoH on a shared drive then our entire squadron was addicted to those games like crack. No one played Goldeneye after the first few days of trying to enjoy it again.

So game play is always the most important thing, but making things look even more realistic also adds a lot to the game. Goldeneye has been fully surpassed over 20 years ago by other games in both game play and graphics.

I just hate it when people like to justify their low tier hardware purchases because they think they are more pure because somehow if a game has great graphics then it means it came at the cost of game play. That is completely false.
You're preaching to the choir here in a lot of respects because my friends and I used to be up all night in multiplayer mode. However, you're never going to convince me that it's even remotely close to modern (that means TODAY'S) graphics. It is garbage compared to it and you know that's true so try being objective. I've been PC gaming since 1986 and the games that I think are the greatest of all-time are Starflight and Starflight II - Trade Routes of the Cloud Nebula. Both of those games are from the 80s and their graphics are garbage compared to N64. It doesn't mean that I don't love them to death, I just am able to immerse myself in games that aren't graphical masterpieces.
 
Nice analysis I wish you would include some VR benchmarking comparisons also as I'd be interested to see how they perform as this is a consideration for a growing number of people