Still among the best GPUs you can buy, let's take an updated look at the battle between the GeForce RTX 3080 and the Radeon RX 6800 XT in a massive 50 game benchmark test.
https://www.techspot.com/review/2427-geforce-rtx-3080-vs-radeon-6800-xt/
Still among the best GPUs you can buy, let's take an updated look at the battle between the GeForce RTX 3080 and the Radeon RX 6800 XT in a massive 50 game benchmark test.
https://www.techspot.com/review/2427-geforce-rtx-3080-vs-radeon-6800-xt/
Ok. Thank you for that in-depth analysis.If you are still in the market for a card, am for the 3080Ti if you can’t get a 3090.
I think you may be right to say that RDNA2 is still not as good as Ampere from an architecture standpoint. Considering that AMD had sizeable advantage over Nvidia from using TSMC 7nm, while Nvidia cheap out and went with Samsung’s 8nm (a refined 10nm). However at the end of the day, gamers will just look at the performance of the card. So if I chose a RX 6800 XT for example, because I know it is just as fast and uses less power. I won’t consider whether AMD is using a better node, faster clock speed to get that kind of performance. I’ve tried both cards, and I don’t think from a pure rasterisation standpoint, any of them stand out. It’s only when you start considering about using the extra features that will tilt the favour considerably towards the RTX 3000 series.I'd say the only reason the Radeon is even in the running at all is because of its higher clock-speeds, with some games favouring those, much more than anything else.
Run both these cards at the same clock-speeds and I bet the 3080 would walk all over the 6800, whether that's running the 6800 at the lower Nvidia clocks or the 3080 (if it were possible) at 6800 level speeds.
Those higher clocks on the 6800 disguise just how inefficient their RDNA2 architecture still is, compared to Nvidia's
I'd say the only reason the Radeon is even in the running at all is because of its higher clock-speeds, with some games favouring those, much more than anything else.
Run both these cards at the same clock-speeds and I bet the 3080 would walk all over the 6800, whether that's running the 6800 at the lower Nvidia clocks or the 3080 (if it were possible) at 6800 level speeds.
Those higher clocks on the 6800 disguise just how inefficient their RDNA2 architecture still is, compared to Nvidia's
you didnt go to 5+grade at school? know you something about ...simple proportion?It's too bad your system is AMD instead of Intel... I'd love to see the numbers with an Intel 12900... I suspect that Nvidia's margin of victory would rise a bit...
Very drole... but we know that AMD GPUs play nicer with AMD CPUs... it would be interesting to measure this effect...you didnt go to 5+grade at school? know you something about ...simple proportion?
AMD clockspeed 1.7 - 2.105GhzRX6800XT :
Transistors- 26,800 million
Die Size- 520 mm²
TDP- 300 W
RTX3080
Transistors- 28,300 million
Die Size- 628 mm²
TDP- 320 W
lets talk about efficiency again
AMD clockspeed 1.7 - 2.105Ghz
Nvidia clockspeed 1.44 - 1.71 Ghz
Think that was his point...
Agreed - but that was the point of the guy who made it... Rooster...I just gave the numbersComparing those GPUs at the same clockspeed does not make sense. Both of them use different strategies in order to deliver the better experience. At the end of the day, in order to evaluate those GPUs what matters is perf and perf/W
Well his point isn't valid. The Radeon card is more effecientAMD clockspeed 1.7 - 2.105Ghz
Nvidia clockspeed 1.44 - 1.71 Ghz
Think that was his point...
So reply to him... not me... don't shoot the messengerWell his point isn't valid. The Radeon card is more effecient
RX6800XT :
Transistors- 26,800 million
Die Size- 520 mm²
TDP- 300 W
RTX3080
Transistors- 28,300 million
Die Size- 628 mm²
TDP- 320 W
lets talk about efficiency again
AMD clockspeed 1.7 - 2.105Ghz
Nvidia clockspeed 1.44 - 1.71 Ghz
Think that was his point...
and 27% faster at 4K.
I couldnt imagine buying a flagship GPU for over $1000 and not get good ray tracing support and DLSS. In particular DLSS is awesome, I use it all the time. In some games it even makes the games look better, in most games it makes the motion look much clearer, theres no trails like you get from TAA. The Radeon is odd, it seems best at 1080p but I couldnt imagine spending this much money on a 1080p card, it would cost like 5 times as much as the monitor itself!
Also after years of being infuriated with AMDs driver support I dont want to go Radeon again for at least a little while. Geforce all the way for me, until they inevitably let me down. But its been 3 years back on Nvidia and so far its been vastly superior in terms of driver support to the previous 8 years I spent using Radeon cards.
Drone: OMG, obliterated! Destroyed!
reading all the facts: FPS difference is really only 9 FPS between the 2, but in this case, the wording makes it more sensational.
Drone: you are a loser!
Oh, trust me, I am more than aware of that.This is done on purpose on the majority of the tech sites. You will see colourful wording which just strokes the fan boys, and brings in more eye balls and clicks.
Not to brag, but I have a 6900XT and a Series X on a LG C9 and except for some games in certain parts (cyberpunk, Arkham games for example), I honestly cannot tell the difference between ultra settings@120 fps on the 6900xt and the performance mode in the Series X.Majority of people will not be able to tell the difference when both GPU are giving playable performance. And I don't know many people that play games staring at a fps counter instead of playing games.
That is a valid real world observation and holds more merit than fanboys arguing over 5-10fps difference. How do you like OLED gaming?Oh, trust me, I am more than aware of that.
Better yet, plenty of these places go farther than that, like for example, look at the article main photo, the nvidia gpu "resting" on top the AMD one, subtle little thing, right?
Not to brag, but I have a 6900XT and a Series X on a LG C9 and except for some games in certain parts (cyberpunk, Arkham games for example), I honestly cannot tell the difference between ultra settings@120 fps on the 6900xt and the performance mode in the Series X.
So due to the true plug and play nature of the console, I have been playing on it more than the PC.
But thats just me.