this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)
Hardware
53 readers
1 users here now
A place for quality hardware news, reviews, and intelligent discussion.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I disagree with the 7800xt part tho. Yea naming scheme is as always manipulative but its not that bad... There is no bad product. only bad pricing. And the new card is the same as its older counterpart. BUT its 200 dollars lower on MSRP which is a huuge difference. completely going away from its older brothers price range. Its the same debait as the RX7/RX8 one is much slower but its half the money at launch times. And compared to 4060 and 4060ti which fails on both counts to be good priced and not be a manipulative 50 tier Die parading as a 60 tier product. Its value proposition of 7800xt is good
6500xt is a bad product.
It's one of the most efficient cards out there, about twice the performance/watt of Nvidias offerings in the price bracket, and the price is low enough that it doesn't matter much that the gaming performance isn't great. For someone that needs a cheap GPU for an HTPC or server with no iGPU, it's not bad. Even runs some older games and emulators well enough.
More than "well enough". It will easily max out PS3 era games, and will play PS4 era at medium/high. Definitely not good for current gen, but it's a great card if you know that's what you want.
Pretty brave to leave this comment in the comment section of a Gamers Nexus video, when they specifically made a video about nad products no matter the price, lol.
This is a quote from Linus Sebastian. One of his many bad takes.
There are absolutely bad products, and badly priced good products.
That quote is probably older than Linus himself.
Its a 150$ lower msrp not 200
Correct me if I am wrong: you are saying that it is okay for the 7800xt to be a weak gpu for it's name, but it is not okay for the 4060 to be a weak gpu for it's name? Afterall, the 6800xt used Navi21 and the 7800XT is on Navi 32.
I think you left the difference of 4060ti vs 7800xt. Its the same as 3060ti in performance and at 400 dollars. Which is the same as 3060ti on sellers now. And for a node shrink and genertion uplift. You gain nothing because its a 50 class die. But it doenst have 50 class die pricing. Navi32 7800xt has 7700xt or 7800 non Xt die. But has 7700xt pricing
7800xt should be 7700xt. But 7800xt is priced as 7700xt (comparing to 6800xt msrp).
4060 is priced as 4060 while it should be named and priced as 4050.
Actually the RX 7800XT should've been called RX 7800, because both has 60CUs and 16GiB of VRAM, and the 7800XT has significant gains over the 6800.
I don't get why AMD released a successor to a previously XT named GPU as non-XT, the RX 7600 (successor of the RX 6600XT, both with 32CUs), and then released a previously non-XT GPU as XT, the RX 7800XT (successor of the RX 6800, both with 60CUs).
4060 Ti is objectively a bad product.
Nope, again just priced badly. All of the Ada Lovlace chips are efficient and performant for what they are.
3060 Ti is literally better.
Thanks to the crypto/AI price gouging, nVidia have been allowed to up tier their GPUs. If the 4060 was released as the 4050 that it probably should've been then the 4060 Ti could've lost the "Ti" part and they could've sold the 16GB version as the plain Ti - with the corresponding price corrections.
4060 Ti is much more efficient + that frame generation. The difference in performance is not material, really. I know imagining is hard for some people but please do try. If you can't judge chips on merit without marketing names and prices, just imagine it would cost $100 cheaper and be called 4060. Wouldn't it be impressive then? So much more perfromant, so much more efficient.
So, again, a great product but a bad pricing.
it literally is not, 4060 Ti is 11% faster at 1080p, 9% faster at 1440p, and 6% faster at 2160p.
the reduced memory bandwidth is already baked into these performance figures, and apart from some edge-cases like emulated PS3/wii at 16K resolution the 4060 Ti is still generally a faster card. not that much faster, but, it's not slower either.
4060 Ti has 128-bit bus width, meaning it will age poorly in the long term. 4060 was designed to be planned obsolescence.
3060 Ti will last you longer as future games will demand more memory bandwidth.
that's what I said, the memory bandwidth is already baked into the numbers you see. the cache increases mean that you don't need as much actual memory bandwidth - it's the same thing AMD did with RDNA2.
AMD reduced the memory bus by 25% on the 6700XT relative to its predecessor and 33% on the 6600XT relative to its predecessor, so, if you think that will cause those cards to age more poorly...
RDNA 2 is dogshit as well, lmao. I'm not defending them either.
The cache increase didn't do shit since the previous generation Ampere performs better at 4K than Ada Lovelace.