Instal Steam
login
|
bahasa
简体中文 (Tionghoa Sederhana)
繁體中文 (Tionghoa Tradisional)
日本語 (Bahasa Jepang)
한국어 (Bahasa Korea)
ไทย (Bahasa Thai)
Български (Bahasa Bulgaria)
Čeština (Bahasa Ceko)
Dansk (Bahasa Denmark)
Deutsch (Bahasa Jerman)
English (Bahasa Inggris)
Español - España (Bahasa Spanyol - Spanyol)
Español - Latinoamérica (Bahasa Spanyol - Amerika Latin)
Ελληνικά (Bahasa Yunani)
Français (Bahasa Prancis)
Italiano (Bahasa Italia)
Magyar (Bahasa Hungaria)
Nederlands (Bahasa Belanda)
Norsk (Bahasa Norwegia)
Polski (Bahasa Polandia)
Português (Portugis - Portugal)
Português-Brasil (Bahasa Portugis-Brasil)
Română (Bahasa Rumania)
Русский (Bahasa Rusia)
Suomi (Bahasa Finlandia)
Svenska (Bahasa Swedia)
Türkçe (Bahasa Turki)
Tiếng Việt (Bahasa Vietnam)
Українська (Bahasa Ukraina)
Laporkan kesalahan penerjemahan
Pedoman dan Aturan Diskusi
Laporkan postingan ini
Lol wow thats a lot of heat over AMD beating Nvidia in this price bracket.
Why are you so upset?
LinusTechTips did a show testing if people could tell which games are running ray tracing vs which games were not, and the overwhelming majority of players couldn't tell the difference between games with ray tracing and games without ray tracing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VGwHoSrIEU
I already told you I don't care if I have to wait a few months for AMD driver issues to get sorted out. And personally, I like that AMD gets along better with the open source community.
If the visuals with ray tracing were really "far better" then more people would have been able to tell the difference in the LinusTechTips ray tracing test I linked to above. Most people couldn't tell the difference -- even among the participating LinusTechTips staff who are way more tech savvy than the average PC gamer.
Also, I have an RTX 3070 currently and looked at some games with and without ray tracing. In most games honestly the differences are subtle and not a big deal. The only game I played where ray tracing was really important to the visual experience was Cyberpunk, but I wouldn't spend another $100 or even $50 on a GPU just to get a somewhat better experience in one game. Which shouldn't be surprising because honestly I wouldn't even pay $50 for the game itself, let alone $100...
It's less about whether I can afford it than it is about how much I value it. I already have a lot of games, so it's not super important to me to add yet another to my library.
Again, your value preferences are not objective, they are subjective. A lot of people don't care about ray tracing at all and would be happy to give that up to save $50 on a GPU, let alone $100 or more. Especially considering as mentioned above, most of the time people can't even tell the difference between a game with ray tracing or without.
The price to performance sweet spot is around $600 right now, so if you saved yourself $50 every time you bought a 7900 G.R.E. instead of a 4070 Super or equivalent, you'd only save up enough money to get your next upgrade free the 11th time you bought a card, and that's assuming price stability is maintained. Are you even going to have another 11 systems in your lifetime? Kind of doesn't make a whole bunch of sense there.
'course you could buy other stuff with that money though, like the actual games you want to buy the card to play in the first place.
Or eggs. >_>
You might want to have a look at this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
Most of ltt staff do not play games or know what they are looking at, raytracing is subtle, but it's there and it really enhances the experiencenot to mention how it will be the future as it both looks better and is faster / cheaper for developers to impliment.
When raytracing first arrived and I started using it, I thought it looked impressive but not world changing, after several hours of being used to the correct lighting abd reflections I went abd disabled it, it was then that I realised how much if a difference it made, it looks subtle as its so much closer to reality that I suddenly noticed things weren't looking as real as they were more than I initially noticed how much closer to reality it looked, it was shadows and reflections and headlights.
Now years on and being used to it as I'm lucky / dumb enough to of had a 2080ti, 3090 and 4090 I'll notice when it's not there more than when it is, simply because with it is closer to reality and without it looks more like a game and faked.
Regarding the 9070/xt it seems those 550/599 price points were introductory only, it's now more than a 5070 and the sane as a 5070ti and no one other than a fanboy will look at the perfirmance and features on a 5070ti a d a 9070xt and go with the AMD option for the same price.
You are right that value can be hard to define, then I ask you, what made the 7090 / 7090xt better value than the 5070 / 5070ti?
No not always. Otherwise we'd all have an iPhone since some people THINK it's so dam great
For der8auer especially it was unfortunately very shoddy testing. Should've been more in depth and comparing OC vs UV vs OC vs UV.
Looks like you completely missed the point. A $700 card is matching a $1000 in gaming performance with next to no effort.
overclocking a 5080 doesn't get you 5080 performance for $700 neither does undervolting it.
The point is theres more 9070xts than 5080s and they are cheaper.
Your response is little more than an emotional freakout.
If they tested things better and showed more games and benchmarks then you'd have something to work with, and if they actually showed how far the 5080 can actually go then it would reveal that it easily can surpass the 4090 without DLSS.
If you're talking strictly native, yes AMD can give better performance per dollar, but NVIDIA's got a higher performance ceiling than AMD can reach which is why they completely gave up on doing a high end this generation because they can't keep up with the 4090. But if you actually use what NVIDIA has to offer and know how to save money up to afford a good product then Nvidia is a no brainer.
People want AMD to be better so badly that they'll use lazy or skewed benchmarks that completely ignore variables because it's just about pushing one specific point. The 9070XT can potentially keep up with a STOCK 5080, but you still don't get DLSS4 or any other NVIDIA features that many NVIDIA buyers appreciate, if you don't appreciate those things then it still doesn't invalidate the truth.
It is very impressive and I am very happy to see that the top model 1 step below can beat the basic model of the model up when stock, this used to always be the case and was a god way to save a few bucks, although, you can still over clock the model up.
However, de8auer didn't exactly test things very thougherly with 1 synthetic and Cp2077 without raytracing etc, which you are also paying for on both cards so should be tested.
I am looking forward to seeing how an overclocked 5070ti vs an overclocked 9070xt do vs one another, with both being a standard available power limit and then if you bypass said limits on both cards (be it modding, bios or simply with more power connectors) to see what they both can do if not held back, I suspect the red devil limited edition with 3 8 pins vs 2 is nit held back by such artificial limitations, but the 2 pin cards might be, the nvidia cards seem to use power to segregate the tiers, which sucks.
Still the 9070xt is impressive, it just comes down to how well it competes with the 5070ti on price abd performance once stock is normalised fir both sides to see which is worth suggesting for those who are happy to tweak and those that want to leave them stock.
Overall, it actually makes me happy, that AMD finally have what looks to be a competitive gpu as competition is always a good thing.
Cheapest available RTX 5080 - 1600 EUR,
RX 9070 XT - 900 EUR,
cheapest available RTX 5070 Ti - 1300 EUR (current prices from NL, real)
For such a price difrence I would expect similar big performance difference, which would not allow cheaper card to be faster than more expensive. You don't?
For what cards? The 9070's?
I have not seen a 9070 or XT variant for MSRP, yet.
Scalpers on amazon are attempting to get nearly 1000 pounds for that card.
The AMD listed MSRP for the 9070's are a myth and AMD has no control over what their partners sell them for. AMD sells the chips and has no own made GPU.
I could walk down to my local butcher and tell he to sell the burgers at such and such a price. That is the amount of authority AMD has on its own partners. Zero.
There will come a price point where you are throwing money out the window and spending money for less performance then if you got an Nvidia card.
Yes, they have missing ROP's. Send it back if you are missing them. Nvidia said they would replace it.