Great benchmark, if you re-run it now you'll find the A750 has moved in the right direction for many games, I had no chance of running RDR2 or Gta5 for the first 6 months, but now in DEC 2023 I can, and they run fast and glitch and crash free.
Yup, I'm still doing benchmarks with it and it gets fixed in many games, tho it still needs a lot more work. But Intel has been moving in the correct direction since launch, updating the drivers constantly and with a really good error reporting tool and team to iron them out with time. I really can't wait for their next gen and see how arc ends in a year or so
ARC A750 need best drivers, but you can notice in the games where have less FPS you have less % usage of your GPU, that means Intel can increase performance with drivers updates. In my case I have an ARC A750 too and you can undervolted it, mine is capped at 120 Watts.
Yeah, as you say there is a lot of headroom for improvement, you can see it on the usage but also in the power consumption, in q lot of games it stays really far from the 190w of tdp
It's hard to decide between a used 1080ti and the cheapest A750 :( Have there been any relevant driver updates for the A750 since, increasing fps in some of the games where it's worse? This would make the decison much easier!
Yep, there have been some driver updates and there should be more coming. The arc has some problems but it is getting fixed little by little and has already improved its results in a couple of games.
@@teflonstestbenchthanks. I know that Intel has made great advancements with their driver's Quality; thats why I asked :) I just do not remember when which update came, and of course not precisely of some of the games you are showing here was affected significantly by the patches. But if you say the Arc might be better now than in the video, then this overall is a point for the A750 I guess! Thanks!
@@elmariachi5133 Why are you comparing an old card, used with a new card waiting to be used... 1080ti has the advantage in VRAM and drivers, i have one and it's still currently kicking it at 1080p gaming just fine, at times i even push 1440p but have to use FSR for that. A750 has the advantage in newer tech and possibly slightly better performance going forward, but looses in drivers, VRAM (8GB is minimum currently, sweet spot is 12gb for the next 3 to 4 years). Since the 1080ti offers 11GB VRAM and similar performance, despite being older tech, it will most likely survive the test of time better than the A750 does due to just that factor alone. But in all seriousness, 1080ti would be a bad purchase for anyone making a build right now, considering the age and 2nd hand market risk. You are better off buying a 3060, which offers similar performance to both, 12GB VRAM, much less power draw, it is a no brainer. The best value IMO is either 7600xt 16gb or rtx 3060 for budget builds, based on values in my area. I could get a RX 6800 16gb for almost the same value as a 7600xt, but this does not apply to all countries out there. A RX 6800 is tempting to buy, but i sincerely am gonna milk the crap out of my 1080ti as much as possible and then evaluate the market again in a couple of years. The future for me will be either a ##60 class system every generation (does not have to be nvidia, it will be whoever offers the best value at the time), or potentially me investing into a handheld system. I currently have the steam deck, it's not the best performance wise, but i like what it offers for what i paid for...
TLoU isn't great on ARC but it actually launches now so... Infinite increase in performance! 5700XT is pretty nice and 1080ti is decent especially considering age. 1080ti also has the VRAM to not worry since the game is VRAM heavy so big boon for it too. Cyberpunk as normal is a great showing for ARC but all are pretty good. I do wonder how much will change if anything on the September update. SotTR is neck and neck on 5700 and 1080Ti. Arc is good but it's definitely the "worst" but when worst is still pretty fast no problem imo. Shadow of War is really good for the 1080Ti - maybe not the craziest as it's more appropriate for it's era. Still, all were good even if ARC lagged behind - again, arc was worst but still pretty good. FH5 loves RDNA so no surprise here - 1080Ti is pretty good and arc is lovely. FH5 can get VRAM hungry so only the 1080ti should venture higher settings. RDR2 is also a really good showing on ARC - if only all their games could be around this showing but that's realistically impossible. The other two are good and fairly close but 1080ti realistically needs a little bit lower settings for the best, and same with 5700xt. Hitman 3... Hmm. I'll give it to the 1080 for it's consistency. Not that any are bad all are good but 1080 is almost a constant high refresh experience. Arc is nice and 5700xt has amazing highs and just great lows, not near perfect as the other 2. Good showing from all 3. HZD doesn't like ARC it seems... That being said? Still very good and playable. 5700xt wins but 1% lows are much closer on 1080ti, maybe it's down to memory bus or VRAM? Interesting regardless. Nice to see ARC continue to develop, it's grown into a mostly safe buy with some amazing showings. It can make a good upgrade for someone who isn't as concerned or doesn't have an older existing library. That being said, I would have preferred a bit better showings in some games as it's losing to fairly old cards in some regards. Regardless, these 3 cards make for good and compelling purchases today - arc can be a warranty new safe pick and the other two for those willing to get a used card. Cause good lord are RDNA 3 and Ada Lovelace terribly priced.
Basically the arc seems to go well on the games that it has some optimization and has good drivers for, but there are a lot where it is still not using all it's tdp and having some dips, but comparing with the first tests it does improve in some titles and with each driver update Intel gets closer to the competition. About the HZD it's because of VRAM yeah, the GTX 1080 ti has a really beefy configuration on that front so it shows in more modern games where it is not optimized by drivers.
VRAM will be the most important on higher resolutions, so if you play at 1080p then 8gb is fine unless for 1 or 2 games where you will have to lower quality a bit. I haven't tested the a770 but I think with the a750 you will be fine and is the better option if you are on a budget as it is usually way cheaper
@@teflonstestbenchawesome thanks! Do you know if ddr5 will be a big difference for arc gpus? I heard it reduced stuttering a lot, were you running ddr5 in this test?
@@corpalgt6261 It literally shows at the start of the video the specs... As for your question about which one to get, A770 is obviously better for future proofing. However, considering that the console generation is in its last stretch, your hardware will survive 3-5 years at best, unless you go very high end on the hardware. The ideal thing to do is to get a good enough system for cheap, around where i live i can get a 4750g, 16gb ddr4 ram and a rtx 3060 12gb for around 650€, the only thing missing in the computer is the operating system, which you can install for free on your own and later on buy a cheap key to activate windows if you want to. A pc with these specs offers performance on the level of a ps5, more or less. Which is sufficient enough performance to survive the rest of the console generation, and could potentially be stretched for another 1-2 years if using 1080p, upscalers and lower quality settings. RTX 3060 is slower than these 3 cards, but not by much, and the extra vram is nice to have. Once you are 2 years into the next gen of consoles, buy another cheap system like this. According to rumours/leaks, microsoft is trying to release the next xbox earlier than sony will do with playstation. Playstation is being aimed at 2027/2028 while xbox is being aimed at 2026/2027. So following this bit of information, your pc should be built to survive untill the next generation drops and becomes the main factor going forward, so ~2027 +2 years. I would expect xbox series and ps5 to still have support for at least 2 years after next gen drops. Albeit it could be possible that xbox series end up dropped earlier due to series s being there and that series consoles have a lower amount of memory than ps5 does. Ps5 is weaker than series x in terms of specs, but the extra amount of memory allows it to survive longer into the next gen introduction. Intel currently does not offer the best bang for buck, they did so earlier on when they revealed the cards, but currently both nvidia and amd have better offers. RTX 3060 is the best bang for buck on the nvidia side probably worldwide and possibly the best bang for buck across all brands, specially if you are buying a cheap prebuilt. On AMD, RX 7600xt offers similar performance to a 3060ti, but has 16gb. Here where i live, this rx 7600xt is cheaper than the a770 16gb by ~40 bucks, also the rx 7600 xt is lower power consumption, meaning you don't need a beefy power supply, also meaning you spend less money on electricity bills for pretty much the same outcome, if not slightly better. I'm aiming these cards in specific because of the VRAM amount they offer. I do believe you should aim for 12GB minimum, but going beyond 16gb is unnecessary because the hardware will not be sufficient enough to fully utilize that much VRAM going forward while at 1080p probably. If you are upgrading just GPU, then check the GPUs alone... You need to consider the performance, vram, cost and power efficiency for 1080p gaming with these cards in your area. I know this was late info, but better late than never, someone else might read this and get some help out of it...
Yeah, they kill all the old products, the clearest example is DLSS 3 that is artificially limited to one RTX 4000. And not only they don't get optimized, but some say they get nerfed too in older games to make the newer GPUs seem faster
@@teflonstestbench that has been tested false over and over again by many people. old gpus not supporting new tech isnt limited to nvidia. there are new amd things that arent supported on older amd gpus
That is simply not true, or course there are new technologies that are not supported by most GPUs, but right now architectures between GPUs are very similar and usually a couple of generations back can support newer technologies too. A completely different thing is what Nvidia did with DLSS 3. It requires fast tensor cores to work and that's why they limited it to the newer GPUs, but the thing is that since RTX 2000 all their cards have tensor cores, and specially the high end models have a lot of tensor cores power. So saying that the RTX 4060 has enough power to support it but the RTX 3090 does not is straight up false and an artificial limitation by invidia to promote their newer cards, as DLSS 3.0 is one of the mayor selling points of those cards and if they made it compatible with older cards then the newer ones would become a lot less attractive to buy.
I want to try that and compare it to the stock results, maybe I'll do it someday, but I don't think it's fair to compare it with other cards using that because that is not stock and performance might vary a lot depending on how you do it. Also I don't test games that old.
There is a point actually, in some places they go for extremely cheap, making them good options if you are tight on budget as the newer ones can be expensive
GTX 1080 ti and Rx 5700 XT are the best picks, the Vega 64 is way too old and power hungry for it's performance. So between those two depending on price and model.
Then I retested some benchmarks and got completely different values. Well, I also have a faster processor, an R7 5800X3D... okay, that makes a difference, but with it I was able to use my GTX 1080 Ti to its full potential and had much higher fps numbers
So the benchmark was 1080p i.e. HD so I changed my setting from UHD to HD. My Maiboar is an MSI PEG B550 and 32 GB DDR4-4000 (1:1) and an ASUS ROG STRIX GTX 1080 Ti GAMING including a pcie4 SSD... and there were only a few values that were actually higher and I'll copy them too could. I don't have all the games@@teflonstestbench
Bro, I am pretty sure the 5700XT should be significantly outperformign a 1080Ti. Do you even have CSM disabled and Smart Access Memory enabled? Nvidia didn't support ReBAR until the 30 series. Your benchmarks are obviously wrong dude. I think you are bottlenecking the 5700XT. The 5700XT should perform between a 2060 and a 2070.
Do you have any source backing up your claims? It's easy to say that what you think is right and what others prove is wrong, but that does not make it right. The RX 5700 XT has never been far ahead of the GTX 1080 Ti and overall has the samish or less performance than the GTX 1080 ti. I'm fact, as you say both cards are between the RTX 2060 (RTX 2060 ≈ GTX 1080) and the RTX 2080 (not 2070) depending on the game and test, maybe closer to a 2070 super.
Depends on the API really. I’m no hater but a beta tester and dx11 is no fun. Ac origins, of odyssey, dying light, just cause 3, Batman Arkham Knight, ac unity, Ryse son of Rome and hunt showdown for example performs pretty bad. Some even unplayable almost at dx11.
Yup, tried some g those and the performance was really bad, and even in newer DX12 games they had issues like Forza horizon 4, but at least it seems they are trying to fix them and with time it will improve, so specially on newer generations it could be interesting to see how competitive they can be
Don't think so, as other 8Gb cards do fine at 1440p. The problem the RX 5700 XT has is with 1% lows, so stability. So if I had to guess I would say it has to do with the architecture as the RX 6600 XT has around the same performance and goes well even with a smaller VRAM bus.
@@teflonstestbench can confirm it, playing Ratchet & Clank with high texture and very low for all setting and TAA, my fps never above 60fps, always stable at 45-55 fps with stuttering issues. Lowering texture to medium with all medium setting TAA, drastically improve my fps to 100+ above (if im not mistaken the number lol)
yeah these are those tests people need to take with a huge piece of salt. down clocking the 1080ti because its an aib card yet will let the amd run rebar which gives a big performance bump to it. smh
Great benchmark, if you re-run it now you'll find the A750 has moved in the right direction for many games, I had no chance of running RDR2 or Gta5 for the first 6 months, but now in DEC 2023 I can, and they run fast and glitch and crash free.
Yup, I'm still doing benchmarks with it and it gets fixed in many games, tho it still needs a lot more work. But Intel has been moving in the correct direction since launch, updating the drivers constantly and with a really good error reporting tool and team to iron them out with time. I really can't wait for their next gen and see how arc ends in a year or so
gracias for the content, congratulations on 1k subs
Thank you so much :) really hope we can continue to grow this channel and test more and more things
Just RDR2 and Horizon Zero Dawn proves that A750’s true power is around 20% better than 5700XT. Really need better API support for Intel
Yeah, and the fact that cyberpunk was that much better surprised me
Yup, it just jumps or dips depending on the game, but at least Intel seems to be caring and fixing the performance
Nice! Well done.
ARC A750 need best drivers, but you can notice in the games where have less FPS you have less % usage of your GPU, that means Intel can increase performance with drivers updates. In my case I have an ARC A750 too and you can undervolted it, mine is capped at 120 Watts.
Yeah, as you say there is a lot of headroom for improvement, you can see it on the usage but also in the power consumption, in q lot of games it stays really far from the 190w of tdp
I use a GTX 1080 Ti and I'm impressed with what the other two can do, really great
:)i love it
its runnin so good
It's hard to decide between a used 1080ti and the cheapest A750 :(
Have there been any relevant driver updates for the A750 since, increasing fps in some of the games where it's worse? This would make the decison much easier!
Yep, there have been some driver updates and there should be more coming. The arc has some problems but it is getting fixed little by little and has already improved its results in a couple of games.
@@teflonstestbenchthanks. I know that Intel has made great advancements with their driver's Quality; thats why I asked :) I just do not remember when which update came, and of course not precisely of some of the games you are showing here was affected significantly by the patches. But if you say the Arc might be better now than in the video, then this overall is a point for the A750 I guess! Thanks!
@@elmariachi5133 Why are you comparing an old card, used with a new card waiting to be used...
1080ti has the advantage in VRAM and drivers, i have one and it's still currently kicking it at 1080p gaming just fine, at times i even push 1440p but have to use FSR for that.
A750 has the advantage in newer tech and possibly slightly better performance going forward, but looses in drivers, VRAM (8GB is minimum currently, sweet spot is 12gb for the next 3 to 4 years). Since the 1080ti offers 11GB VRAM and similar performance, despite being older tech, it will most likely survive the test of time better than the A750 does due to just that factor alone.
But in all seriousness, 1080ti would be a bad purchase for anyone making a build right now, considering the age and 2nd hand market risk. You are better off buying a 3060, which offers similar performance to both, 12GB VRAM, much less power draw, it is a no brainer.
The best value IMO is either 7600xt 16gb or rtx 3060 for budget builds, based on values in my area. I could get a RX 6800 16gb for almost the same value as a 7600xt, but this does not apply to all countries out there. A RX 6800 is tempting to buy, but i sincerely am gonna milk the crap out of my 1080ti as much as possible and then evaluate the market again in a couple of years.
The future for me will be either a ##60 class system every generation (does not have to be nvidia, it will be whoever offers the best value at the time), or potentially me investing into a handheld system. I currently have the steam deck, it's not the best performance wise, but i like what it offers for what i paid for...
TLoU isn't great on ARC but it actually launches now so... Infinite increase in performance! 5700XT is pretty nice and 1080ti is decent especially considering age. 1080ti also has the VRAM to not worry since the game is VRAM heavy so big boon for it too.
Cyberpunk as normal is a great showing for ARC but all are pretty good. I do wonder how much will change if anything on the September update.
SotTR is neck and neck on 5700 and 1080Ti. Arc is good but it's definitely the "worst" but when worst is still pretty fast no problem imo.
Shadow of War is really good for the 1080Ti - maybe not the craziest as it's more appropriate for it's era. Still, all were good even if ARC lagged behind - again, arc was worst but still pretty good.
FH5 loves RDNA so no surprise here - 1080Ti is pretty good and arc is lovely. FH5 can get VRAM hungry so only the 1080ti should venture higher settings.
RDR2 is also a really good showing on ARC - if only all their games could be around this showing but that's realistically impossible. The other two are good and fairly close but 1080ti realistically needs a little bit lower settings for the best, and same with 5700xt.
Hitman 3... Hmm. I'll give it to the 1080 for it's consistency. Not that any are bad all are good but 1080 is almost a constant high refresh experience. Arc is nice and 5700xt has amazing highs and just great lows, not near perfect as the other 2. Good showing from all 3.
HZD doesn't like ARC it seems... That being said? Still very good and playable. 5700xt wins but 1% lows are much closer on 1080ti, maybe it's down to memory bus or VRAM? Interesting regardless.
Nice to see ARC continue to develop, it's grown into a mostly safe buy with some amazing showings. It can make a good upgrade for someone who isn't as concerned or doesn't have an older existing library. That being said, I would have preferred a bit better showings in some games as it's losing to fairly old cards in some regards. Regardless, these 3 cards make for good and compelling purchases today - arc can be a warranty new safe pick and the other two for those willing to get a used card. Cause good lord are RDNA 3 and Ada Lovelace terribly priced.
Basically the arc seems to go well on the games that it has some optimization and has good drivers for, but there are a lot where it is still not using all it's tdp and having some dips, but comparing with the first tests it does improve in some titles and with each driver update Intel gets closer to the competition.
About the HZD it's because of VRAM yeah, the GTX 1080 ti has a really beefy configuration on that front so it shows in more modern games where it is not optimized by drivers.
should i get an a770 or a750 ? How useful will that 16gb vram be on a770 in the future if im on a budget.
VRAM will be the most important on higher resolutions, so if you play at 1080p then 8gb is fine unless for 1 or 2 games where you will have to lower quality a bit. I haven't tested the a770 but I think with the a750 you will be fine and is the better option if you are on a budget as it is usually way cheaper
@@teflonstestbenchawesome thanks! Do you know if ddr5 will be a big difference for arc gpus? I heard it reduced stuttering a lot, were you running ddr5 in this test?
@@corpalgt6261 It literally shows at the start of the video the specs...
As for your question about which one to get, A770 is obviously better for future proofing. However, considering that the console generation is in its last stretch, your hardware will survive 3-5 years at best, unless you go very high end on the hardware.
The ideal thing to do is to get a good enough system for cheap, around where i live i can get a 4750g, 16gb ddr4 ram and a rtx 3060 12gb for around 650€, the only thing missing in the computer is the operating system, which you can install for free on your own and later on buy a cheap key to activate windows if you want to. A pc with these specs offers performance on the level of a ps5, more or less. Which is sufficient enough performance to survive the rest of the console generation, and could potentially be stretched for another 1-2 years if using 1080p, upscalers and lower quality settings. RTX 3060 is slower than these 3 cards, but not by much, and the extra vram is nice to have. Once you are 2 years into the next gen of consoles, buy another cheap system like this.
According to rumours/leaks, microsoft is trying to release the next xbox earlier than sony will do with playstation. Playstation is being aimed at 2027/2028 while xbox is being aimed at 2026/2027. So following this bit of information, your pc should be built to survive untill the next generation drops and becomes the main factor going forward, so ~2027 +2 years. I would expect xbox series and ps5 to still have support for at least 2 years after next gen drops. Albeit it could be possible that xbox series end up dropped earlier due to series s being there and that series consoles have a lower amount of memory than ps5 does. Ps5 is weaker than series x in terms of specs, but the extra amount of memory allows it to survive longer into the next gen introduction.
Intel currently does not offer the best bang for buck, they did so earlier on when they revealed the cards, but currently both nvidia and amd have better offers. RTX 3060 is the best bang for buck on the nvidia side probably worldwide and possibly the best bang for buck across all brands, specially if you are buying a cheap prebuilt. On AMD, RX 7600xt offers similar performance to a 3060ti, but has 16gb. Here where i live, this rx 7600xt is cheaper than the a770 16gb by ~40 bucks, also the rx 7600 xt is lower power consumption, meaning you don't need a beefy power supply, also meaning you spend less money on electricity bills for pretty much the same outcome, if not slightly better. I'm aiming these cards in specific because of the VRAM amount they offer. I do believe you should aim for 12GB minimum, but going beyond 16gb is unnecessary because the hardware will not be sufficient enough to fully utilize that much VRAM going forward while at 1080p probably. If you are upgrading just GPU, then check the GPUs alone... You need to consider the performance, vram, cost and power efficiency for 1080p gaming with these cards in your area.
I know this was late info, but better late than never, someone else might read this and get some help out of it...
1080Ti lagging because Nigreedia is not optimizing drivers for it anymore, as usual. They don't care about their older GPUs.
Yeah, they kill all the old products, the clearest example is DLSS 3 that is artificially limited to one RTX 4000.
And not only they don't get optimized, but some say they get nerfed too in older games to make the newer GPUs seem faster
@@teflonstestbench typical Nigreedia strategies to make apes keep upgrading for newer gen.
@@teflonstestbench that has been tested false over and over again by many people. old gpus not supporting new tech isnt limited to nvidia. there are new amd things that arent supported on older amd gpus
1080ti is still fully supported
That is simply not true, or course there are new technologies that are not supported by most GPUs, but right now architectures between GPUs are very similar and usually a couple of generations back can support newer technologies too. A completely different thing is what Nvidia did with DLSS 3. It requires fast tensor cores to work and that's why they limited it to the newer GPUs, but the thing is that since RTX 2000 all their cards have tensor cores, and specially the high end models have a lot of tensor cores power. So saying that the RTX 4060 has enough power to support it but the RTX 3090 does not is straight up false and an artificial limitation by invidia to promote their newer cards, as DLSS 3.0 is one of the mayor selling points of those cards and if they made it compatible with older cards then the newer ones would become a lot less attractive to buy.
👍 👍
Can you do this same test but for a770
Yeah will do it when I can get the card, so bout a month or two I hope
Now re-run the test with DirectX 9 games. And another re-run by using DXVK for the DirectX 9 games.
I want to try that and compare it to the stock results, maybe I'll do it someday, but I don't think it's fair to compare it with other cards using that because that is not stock and performance might vary a lot depending on how you do it. Also I don't test games that old.
@@teflonstestbench You can also test the other cards with DXVK.
Смысла больше нет покупать 1080/1080ti?? Теперь брать 5700xt?? Или интел?)
There is a point actually, in some places they go for extremely cheap, making them good options if you are tight on budget as the newer ones can be expensive
@@teflonstestbench или лучше докинуть и 5700xt? А может и вообще vega 64 взять.
GTX 1080 ti and Rx 5700 XT are the best picks, the Vega 64 is way too old and power hungry for it's performance. So between those two depending on price and model.
Then I retested some benchmarks and got completely different values. Well, I also have a faster processor, an R7 5800X3D... okay, that makes a difference, but with it I was able to use my GTX 1080 Ti to its full potential and had much higher fps numbers
Can you give exact figures? And at what settings and resolution?
So the benchmark was 1080p i.e. HD so I changed my setting from UHD to HD. My Maiboar is an MSI PEG B550 and 32 GB DDR4-4000 (1:1) and an ASUS ROG STRIX GTX 1080 Ti GAMING including a pcie4 SSD... and there were only a few values that were actually higher and I'll copy them too could. I don't have all the games@@teflonstestbench
Yeah but depending on the in-game configuration and the test you do in-game the result can vary a lot
Bro, I am pretty sure the 5700XT should be significantly outperformign a 1080Ti. Do you even have CSM disabled and Smart Access Memory enabled? Nvidia didn't support ReBAR until the 30 series. Your benchmarks are obviously wrong dude. I think you are bottlenecking the 5700XT. The 5700XT should perform between a 2060 and a 2070.
Do you have any source backing up your claims? It's easy to say that what you think is right and what others prove is wrong, but that does not make it right.
The RX 5700 XT has never been far ahead of the GTX 1080 Ti and overall has the samish or less performance than the GTX 1080 ti. I'm fact, as you say both cards are between the RTX 2060 (RTX 2060 ≈ GTX 1080) and the RTX 2080 (not 2070) depending on the game and test, maybe closer to a 2070 super.
So summary - Arc is not as bad as haters on the internet claims
Depends on the API really. I’m no hater but a beta tester and dx11 is no fun. Ac origins, of odyssey, dying light, just cause 3, Batman Arkham Knight, ac unity, Ryse son of Rome and hunt showdown for example performs pretty bad. Some even unplayable almost at dx11.
Yup, tried some g those and the performance was really bad, and even in newer DX12 games they had issues like Forza horizon 4, but at least it seems they are trying to fix them and with time it will improve, so specially on newer generations it could be interesting to see how competitive they can be
RX 5700XT Nitro avec un 5800X3X ca dépote encore
What happend to 5700xt? it used to lose to 1080ti in all games.
It depends on the games and the resolution, specially with the RX 5700 XT it performs worst at 1440p
@@teflonstestbenchbecause lack of vram?
Don't think so, as other 8Gb cards do fine at 1440p. The problem the RX 5700 XT has is with 1% lows, so stability. So if I had to guess I would say it has to do with the architecture as the RX 6600 XT has around the same performance and goes well even with a smaller VRAM bus.
@@teflonstestbench can confirm it, playing Ratchet & Clank with high texture and very low for all setting and TAA, my fps never above 60fps, always stable at 45-55 fps with stuttering issues.
Lowering texture to medium with all medium setting TAA, drastically improve my fps to 100+ above (if im not mistaken the number lol)
Psi.ex 4.0 bro
yeah these are those tests people need to take with a huge piece of salt. down clocking the 1080ti because its an aib card yet will let the amd run rebar which gives a big performance bump to it. smh