Just a quick correction, the 7800XT debuted at $499 not $599 and i misspoke about the 4080D when it was a 4090D. Regardless of the misspeaks the charts still show a huge value for this card! Sorry for the numbering mistakes!
Wish these prices we similar in sweden, but they're waaay off. Oh well i've been getting used to it by now. So many good value cards, are terrible value here. And the cards that should be good value cards, are overpriced. We never woke up from the covid/crypto era. :|
One thing no one ever seems to mention is with Nivida's 4000 series you either have to buy a new PSU that comes with the 12VHPWR cable or use the 12VHPWR adaptor to power the card, if the card even comes with an included adaptor. Whereas the AMD cards still use 8 pin and don't catch fire unlike the 12VHPWR cable.
Tons of people mention the inconvenience of using the 12VHPWR cable/adapter. Yes, it has real issues, but there is no situation where you have to buy an entirely new PSU solely to power the GPU. Up to the 4070 you can get a regular 8 pin model, use the adapter that comes free with _all_ 12VHPWR GPUs, buy a separate 12VHPWR cable compatible with any PSU, or choose an ATX 5.0 PSU in the case that you need a new PSU for your upgrade regardless.
@@BeyondReasonableClout To specify, you can buy a 12VHPWR cable compatible with any PSU realistically used for a high tier GPU like this because there are multiple cable types, for multiple types of PSU. The cable you need is listed on the PSU product info page. All you do is match the pin-out on your PSU to the 12VHPWR, and you can use that cable. So a compatible 12VHPWR cable exists for most PSUs, which is why I said it’s compatible with “all” as a general statement. Could have worded it better, but the overall point still stands.
can we please have chapter breakouts for these videos so we can reference stats later?? especially for reviews, it really helps when we want to reference performance from you!
@@goofballbiscuits3647 Unless you're running a rig with the same exact parts/specs as their test rig, the benchmarks are essentially meaningless, because you won't see the same numbers on your system. And as I said, your eyes won't notice the difference alone. Hardware Unboxed tested a 7900GRE card (twice) and didn't come to the same conclusion as this video (either time). It's all subjective. And of course, they tested a different brand GRE card, and their test rig had different specs, and they compared it to some different brands of 7800XT/7900XT cards, among others..
If you add a vertical line to show where the centre card lands next to the others, it's more clear than just having them next to each other on the same chart. Keep the centre card and it being a completely different colour, that's great and really visible :)
I love the older generations being on these charts cause it allows us with older cards to know much better where we stand and weather or not we should consider upgrading.
I agree a popular and relevant older card should be on the list since it's very likely the masses out there are still using them. While I have newer cards the one in the system i use daily is a 3060TI. When I eventually see a massive performance gain over it (2-3-400%) i'll be going hmm.. maybe it's time for a upgrade.
@@SonicAngel2020 edit it homie, lol. Usually I don’t auto correct someone, but I fully agree, but damn this killed me a bit and I’m looking out for you 😂😂😂😂. I’ll delete my comment prior though so I don’t get flamed
It's a Navi 31 chip, can't use another substrate. The Navi 32 substrate also has SMTs and SMDs on the upper part. It's not rotated 90 degrees, it's just how that picture was taken.
@@ReHWolutionit can use the same designated substrate, or well at least structure of Navi 32. This is one of the biggest reasons AMD went with chiplets, they can flip things around and create interesting products with far less R&D. RX 7900 GRE is basically a 7800 XT with crappier vram but a navi 31 gcd slapped in there.
@@roundduckkirathat's not how it works. Substrates are made for specific chips for a reason, and that is saving cost. It's nonsense using a more expensive substrate for a lower tier chip. In this case, being a Navi 31 XL chip, it cannot use a Navi 32 substrate, as the Navi 32 substrate doesn't have the same internal layout as the Navi 31 substrate. A substrate isn't just a piece of square silicon. It's a PCB interposer that manages all the electrical connections between a chip and the main PCB. A Navi 31 GCD is 50% bigger than a Navi 32 GCD, with way more electrical connections than a Navi 32 GCD. It would also defy the main purpose of the 7900 GRE/N31XL: saving money on defective Navi 31 chips. What's the point of re-using defective chips if you then have to engineer a different way to connect it to a PCB?
@@ReHWolution not if it's designed to be that flexible right off the bat, which is how it's been done with the Zen 2-4 eras of layouts where one normal chiplet can get replaced by an x3d chiplet or zen 2 and 3 can reuse I/O chiplets.
One suggestion: Most of the tests are regarding gaming performance. There is a bunch of us who wants to see how gpus are performing in photoshop, premier pro, after effects, blender... so basically how they are compared for productivity work. Thanks
i got a 6950 last year for 600, this is about the same performance with lower wattage, but i dont see any reason to upgrade. probly wont til hopefully 9000 series
@@bradhaines3142 I got lucky with mine and it's been a great overclocking card too so underwater I'm getting some amazing performance for $400ish. If I ever jump to 4k 144hz I might upgrade but otherwise I'm gonna rock this thing for a while
@@terminusaquo1980 I have a 6700xt before my 6800xt. It ran everything just fine at 1440p but I was wanted to do another custom loop so figured I should do a little upgrade before putting a block on
I like the layout you've gone with having the review card in the #5 spot of 9 cards. The only addition I would like is to have the MSRP next to the cards names. I'm hearing you reference the MSRP difference between the cards, but it would be nice to be able to see it also.
I'm happy that you sorted the graphs for 1440p resolution - I feel like far too many reviewers STILL put entirely too much focus on 1080p results, when it's been long enough and cards have gotten good enough that 1080p shouldn't be the benchmark any longer. It doesn't really tell you much of anything any more - and in my opinion hasn't for quite some time. Especially considering 4K resolution is something manufacturers are targeting more and more these days, really 1440p should be the new minimum standard that everyone should be working at to get as good as current 1080p performance/quality is now at.
A fair take. I mean, plenty of ppl do still use 1080p to game but if a benchmark reads 150 fps for 1440p you can get a good enough idea that the 1080p perf is going to be more than 99% of ppl will need or be able to make use of. Otoh, me maining 3440x1440 I always find myself having to guess an approximate between 1440p and 4K (is that halfway between the two, 2/3's the way etc) which I'm kind of used to by now but it's still a little annoying.
You mentioned something that sparked a thought in my head about the charting. Part of what I’d be looking for is a price to performance comparison at the point in time when you are doing the review. And something that could point me to the closest comparisons both in price and performance. As an example if the chart was a graph centered on the card being reviewed and the x-axis was performance and the y-axis was price then plot the closest cards around it? So top right is the faster but more expensive, and bottom left is slower but less expensive. And when you see stuff in the top left those are the cards that look way worse, and bottom right are the cards that are recommended instead of the card in the center? Also I am not sure if there could be a shorthand way to include benchmark date, benchmark build version, gpu driver version, and windows version, and card cost at the time of running. As those are metrics that might be interesting to see if all runs over time increase in speed and it could be one of those other items that is doing it. Even an identifier that counted up whenever one of those variables changed so you could see if any two runs were at the same time and the other environment variables were the same?
Data analyst here 4:44 give your self some credit Jay, these visuals are pretty easy to digest. Your excel skills are above par with what we’d expect here in the corporate world!!!
12:00 jay, ty for the new method of drawing a circle around the card and showing which cards land and where. it is MUCH better than the old way, im sorry because it seems like ALOT of extra work for you... asalwaystyforyourhardworkanddedication!!!
GPU prices are just insane now. But on the bright side the lower these new cards get the lower the previous gen GPUs get. Now you can find a 3070 or 6700XT for around $280 which are still amazing 1440p gaming GPUs
As someone who got the 7900 XT w/ the Starfield bundle when it launched, (which dropped the price tag to effective $650 for the GPU), it's nice to see the 7900 XT hold up in charts. I was able to get the price tag so low because I traded the game to a friend of mine since he wanted it anyway and while I'm sure I won't get such a good deal every time, it's good to take advantage of such a chance when it comes up.
The only reason people are jaded and don't care about cards is because the 2 big card companies making them have been pissing on their customers for so long.
@@TriggernlfrlLOL, ok hardware guru! Yeah, my first dedicated video card was only the 3Dfx Voodoo 2. I've only built my own PCs since 1994, and my first PC was the C64, so I probably don't know the complete history of PCs. Maybe you "really" know hardware history, but what I'm talking about here is the current sentiment a lot of PC gamers have toward AMD and NVIDIA that's been continuously reinforced for the past 5 - 10 years. Maybe you're a crypto miner, and don't see things the same way, but historically speaking gamers were the original core customer base for this hardware, and these days they're an afterthought at best.
You saved me! I just ordered a 7800 XT and I didn't know about the existence of this 7900 GRE. Where I live, it's slightly more expensive and I can afford it. Thanks!
Set location for card reviewed is great. Making it a different color or outlined would make it stand out. Knowing which cards fall in that range is quite informative for me. It tells what other options you have if you don't choose that card.
And that just solidifies my GPU Choice... Was waiting to see if you would do a GRE review....Hellhound is 579 on Newegg right now. Sapphire Pulse is 549...Waiting for a call back from power color on if they have a Red Devil GRE coming out I personally like the color shift
i ordered the steel legend rx 7900 gre, my 1st AMD card, i went with it over the 4070 super because of the 16gb of V-ram & i don't care for ray tracing at all. Just tired of Nvidia right now, gonna dabble in team red for a bit until they release an "affordable" card that has more than 12gb of V-ram.
@robertkirk9631 the vram ram argument is moot considering the 12gb nvidia card has higher 1% lows than 16gb amd cards and can outperform with less vram. But you do you. The amd cards below the 7900xt are a waste of money
one thing I think a lot of people may enjoy seeing, is talking the average scores of all the FPS tests and then dividing that by the MSRP giving us a FPS per $1. So you would see something like: 3080Ti 1080p (avg): 156 @ $2.50/FPS 7950XT 1080p (avg): 230 @ $0.75/FPS etc. It would really hammer home the actual "Value" of the card. PS - as a data guy, I would have so much fun with your charts! I love paying with them, it is my job too.
The trouble with $/fps charts is that you could get budget cards outranking flagship cards on the table, so that could be confusing to some people without proper explanation.
it gets messy quickly as you would also have do charts with power consumption and power consumption depending on energy prices like gamers nexus did in video about CPU efficiency. Theres wild differences nowadays like 4080 vs 7900XTX can be 200w difference in really extreme and rare scenarios (low demanding games like ow2)
The chart format is good to show that specific cards relative performance, and where it lands. But what I like with "conventional" charts that have the same cards on every page is that you can use them for comparing the performance of the the other cards as well, and not just the one being reviewed. I use that quite often by looking up reviews of a newer card than the one im interested in. That way I can see how it performs against a card that wasn't available when it was reviewed first.
yeah, the idea of the relative performance is great but the closest rival in price card needs to be on the chart. Whether its lower than the last card or higher the fastest card. Its the competitor
@@SkoomaChugger yeah but that doesn't excuse letting shit content through. He has two employees who are very smart and capable, they can absolutely be proof reading/watching. And if they aren't enough he could absolutely hire a third person to check over stuff. I mean look at the ram video, that was such a bad video. How that ever made it out of the studio boggles my mind
I really loved that you included less. So many have so much data on the page and then rush through it. This was nice to see where the "comparatives" are. Maybe if you categorized instead by all within a similar price range, that would have been even nicer. Like "all cards thing $100 of this card" type of deal. And the colors didn't bother me, but I'm not colorblind so I can't speak to that.
Im so glad you're comparing cards within their "skill bracket" so to speak. Now it's not just a chart showing us how poor we are and how good the most expensive card is by comparison. You held my attention with these comparisons much longer and I appreciate the value that brings to the channel
i mean, only showing comparable devices is definitely gave better picture than lots of GPUs that are either too high or low the stack to the reviewed product.
@@alrecks619 sometimes people want older stuff on the charts to figure out how much of an upgrade the reviewed part would be to what they have now. It's not just about what a part is competing with.
@@chaon93 For anyone upgrading it would not make any sense to upgrade from a 6800 XT to this GRE...however if you had a 5700 XT then this card would be a great upgrade even though you are spending $100 more than the MSRP of the 5700 XT was. So for $100 higher MSRP you more than double your performance since the 7900 GRE is 221% faster than the 5700 XT. This makes no sense for anyone with a 6700 or 6800 XT as an upgrade. As hardware unboxed found most people upgrade every 2-3 generations. I have a GTX `080 so once the 6900 XT drops to around $250 I will upgrade.
I like the 3 separate bars for averages of each resolution, but I'd like if there was a 1% low indicated on each bar as well. I value stability as much as raw performance.
I recommend that he not. I bought a 7800XT specifically to try to max gains at 1080p from my old 5700XT. 7700XT didn't have enough VRAM for the period of time I need this for. 7600XT was too slow. I already push 12+ gigs of VRAM on this card on DX11 games from 2020 with no raytracing. How about he just drop what you're buying for instead?🤷♂You seem to have your hands full trying to screw actual buyers like me over to use this presented data lmao.
For me the ideal way to do "price based" benchmarks like this one is to do the model above & model below & equivalent from the other company (or 2) with maybe a further lower and/or higher tier card for scaling. The 7900GRE was available in OEM form in Australia & in a few EU countries in DIY form at a ~$649 price so to me the $549 is a price cut & relaunch.
I just got the RX 7900 GRE Pure OC and my oh my what a card for the price. My first ever high end card and I'm happy and my daughters too cause they have dad's old RTX 2070 super in their rig. Win win :)
Jay, you asked for feedback on your charts. The only glaring issue I see is that you don't include 1% Low FPS numbers alongside the averages. Having a smooth gaming experience is extremely important to me, and the 1% Low numbers are the only real way to check those. Thanks! ⭐⭐
Other than the colour change, I think having the RRP at launch on each card would be beneficial. As it is difficult to remember the prices for multiple generations at launch. And that way (to me at least) it would show how close the tested card is to other price ranges since the charts are not organised by price now. Hope that makes sense.
This highlights how out of line the cards above this are. $50 between the 7800xt and 7900gre. Another $50 to the 4070 super. Then big jumps for small gains to the 4070ti super and 7900xt.
Would love to have one or two of the lower end cards on there 2000, 3000, from Nvidia, and 5000 series from AMD. They don't need to be discussed at all but it gives those that are still holding out in that category to see the difference from what they are using to what is being shown. We all know they are upgrades, but just how big and where that point is that you just really need to finally make a move is super helpful.
I think that your chart idea that you're using is actually really great. It keeps things relevant. The one thing that I would change about it is that I would add pricing to each card to really show how good (or bad) the value of the card being reviewed is.
Thx for the vid👍. I'm colorblind and don't care what colors you use, and I like this format for charts. Call it a Dartboard Chart: what's around the target. In Canada, the 7900xt starts at $1100CAD, the 7800XT is $680-$780CAD and the GRE is $750-$760. I'm getting one now B4 they jump in price.
I love the idea of the card being tested being right in the middle of the chart compared to comparable cards. These charts were the most useful to me out of all the charts I have seen so far. Thank you for this video.
I'm going to be building a second PC here soon and the 7900 GRE is a no-brainer. The closest Nvidia card is the 4070 Super, which is ~$50-80 more expensive on Newegg.
Closest? They are neck and neck, and in raster 7900 GRE comes on top and obviously 4070S in raytracing. 7900 gre can do 4k as well, and it can do decent ray tracing, too. I like the 7900 GRE better because of the 16gb Vram. If the 4070S had 16gb vram, it would be a no-brainer. Plus, DLSS and FSR3 are both pretty good it all depends on how sensitive you are. I can't see the difference, but I do need glasses for far away objects, so maybe I can't see the finer details that well.
As a content creator I was thinking you were using screen recording for the switch to the computer screen and then I noticed Jay's fingers in the lower right corner... Talk about a well thought out workflow!
LOVE THE GRAPHS! keeping the review card in the middle makes comparing from chart to chart so much easier & the focus on 1440p makes total sense with bottlenecks and resolution trends Also, as an analyst myself... simpler is often better, don't make the charts too "busy" since the human brain can't comprehend more than ~7 pieces of information at a time - MattsTwoCents 😛
this will be a huge upgrade from my 6700xt. One thing I'd love from the graphics card videos so I do not have to hop around from content creator to content creator is at the low end what cpu's won't bottleneck it. going from low to high, idk for me maybe others I try to go mid to high tier every 2-4 years but CPU tends to be every 5 years or so for an upgrade unless necessary. Im running a Ryzen 7 5700x currently because i have AMD AM4 X570 ATX gaming motherboard. Or maybe i just need to research more to fully understand myself where the bottlenecks happen, idk. just a thought
AMD gpus will do better compared to nvidia when cpu bottlenecked since they have a hardware scheduler while nvidia does it on the CPU. A 5700x will do just fine, but a 5800x3d would be a nice upgrade especially with a faster card.
The charts are good. Maybe stack them by performance (from worse to better) and put the 1% and 0.1% lows on the charts (I think the 1% low is very important). Also, is good to see several GPU's compared on the charts, it's easy to have a good look on the options this way.
Outside the colors (that can't matter less to me, haha), I like the approach of "+/-4 cards to the current one" on the new charts. Cards that appear on a chart but no on the other can be somewhat calculated and that way we have more info without filling the screen.
You can get this card for 499 now. It's the best card per performance for the money. It preforms close to $900-$1000 dollar cards for half the price. It's 15-20fps better than the 7800XT for the same price. It's a no brainier. The Asian market card basically cut the thorat of the 7800Xt there is no reason to buy this card as long as the GRE is available.
Hey @JayzTwoCents, Just a Heads up Jay, 2:43 Here where you were speaking on the Die being arranged differently, well if you look closer to the diagram Picture, it shows you the little arrow in the top left corner, on the Die itself, for how you would install it, on the RX 7900 XT card on the right, and the RX 7900 GRE'S Die in the bottom left that little arrow is is in the bottom left, so they may not be the same, But the picture is wrong anyway. whoever took the pictures to make that post, didn't place it correctly for the photo! Hope this Helps ya Buddy! Thanks so much for all you do Jay, you and tour team are Awesome and are so helpful, with all your awesome videos! Keep up the Awesome Job man, I watch you a lot!
Starfield, Helldivers 2, Cyberpunk, Far Cry 6. The main titles that should be considered when running benchmarks due to older games are sometimes suited better to the older architecture. It is just nice to see how the older cards hold up to the newest cards in games that are new or constantly being updated.
You know, that way of organizing the charts by 1440p. It makes it easier to see the averages for a rough estimate. Edit: Also, a 4th bar for price to performance.
Don't stress about the colours on the charts Jay, both the layout of the graphs and your narration are absolutely spot on. Yet another awesome video, keep it up brother. Our best wishes for your health and we hope that you're feeling better - Australian Nerd and Geek Community.
Nice way to present it, makes easier to understand what the graphics is competing with, the colors are not that bad. I think 5 above, 5 below would make more sense, I would also put 4k first 1440p second and 1080p last (maybe consider removing 1080p at all, most tests report too high FPSs and this makes the reading harder, and sometimes weird because of the huge bars). Please, after AMD fix the driver, test a overclocked version of this card like the Saphire Nitro+, I think it will close the gap to the 7900 XT even more.
Sadly in the the UK the 7900 Hellhound Gre is £849.00 which is only £40 less than the 4070ti super tuf. Bit of a shame as it makes it less of a bargain and more and more graphics card are all around the same price making it very confusing. Still a good video looking at the benchmarks as it does show how well it performs.
I would like to see at least 4 or 5 different products from latest generation for each manufacturer. Then probably show only last 2 generations with lesser amount of product from older generation. Example: 7900XTX, 7900XT, 7800XT, 7700XT, 6950XT, 6900XT and 6800XT for AMD side and RTX4080 Super, RTX4080, RTX4070Ti Super, RTX4070Ti, RTX4070 Super, RTX3090, RTX3080Ti and RTX3080 for 7900GRE comparison. Price per FPS is a very good way to show the best bang for buck item. If I'm not in a tight budget I can simply check where the card stands in competition and if I'm I can simply check which mid range product makes more sense. Also for presentation we always recommend people to use dfifferent main color bases like orange from red, light blue from blue and grass green from green colors for triple data sets. Then you can simply make benchmarked card as white or black and you can make your charts shine.
So as far as colors on the chart, this isn't absolutely needed, but color temperature based on performance per dollar would be nice compared to the baseline card. Such as green for a better cost/performance and red for a poor. And a gradient between?
I always struggled to read these data sheets but this way was actually a lot more comprehensible for me to understand. I think if anything, making the card being reviewed more obvious in some way would make it that much better.
The new Avatar Frontiers of pandora has a pretty awesome benching suite. Nice modern and pretty hard to run game as well. Should hold up the the future quite nicely. So it would be awesome to see that included! Thanks for all your hide work. Wishing you good health 😊
For people wanting to get the GRE keep in mind the clock speeds listed for each, some have a drastically overclocked boost and base clock and those might get even higher FPS.
I like the layout of these charts, only addition I'd like to see is the current pricing listed for the cards as well. When we start seeing last gen cards it's tough to evaluate based on these charts whether or not the current gen is worth it from a price perspective
For the graph bars, I'd suggest some consistent coloring (would say red for AMD, green for Nvidia, but probably need other colors to avoid colorblind issues). Card under examination is "brightest" shade of color, with same-gen cards being slightly darker shade, and older generations of cards being darker shades (neon green for current card under review, bright-green for same-gen, mid-green for 1 gen back, dark green for 2 gens back, etc.).
9:49 this is specifically among the reasons why I appreciate your channel, Jay. No bullshit, no fuss no muss. You show straight numbers and the numbers are true. Them boosting their numbers to make it look better by pushing DLSS and all that BS pisses me off. I will *never* use them, so I want to see what the cards to *without* it, and you do that. If the card can't perform good without DLSS, it needs to be reevaluated
For the charts, I like the fact that you put more cards on them to really see where the cards land in terms of performance. But I found it hard to follow the price/performance if that make sense. I think either : 1. 2 chart per tests, one with near performing cards whatever MSRP (with MSRP written under the card name) and one with same MSRP whatever performing. Or 2. A chart with near performance (with MSRP written under the card name) but class by MSRP rather than FPS. Personally I think the 2nd option would be great to builders, especially new ones, to know what they get for the money.
I like the way you produced the charts here. It's more digestible than a chart with every GPU ever. This is actually something I'd like to see in some kind of database (Thanks Steve) where you could pick a GPU and view its nearest 'rivals' in various benchmarks. The GPUs don't change all that much: The 7900 XT, 7800 XT and 6950 XT, as well as at least 2 of the '4070' SKUs are in almost every chart, so it's reasonably consistent. I would maybe add the approximate current pricing (from Newegg or Amazon maybe) to the Y-axis alongside the model of GPU. In a chart that is comparing the closest competition in performance to a given GPU, surely then the most important thing is the price of those GPUs?
Hey Jay, a little feedback regarding the charts. I think the format is good aside from the colors. Would be nice if you would present 1440p and 4k individually or after another so we are not bombarded with a screen full of numbers. Otherwise great video! Also greetings from Germany, loving your videos since 2018
So I’d start with a copy of Steve@GN on how to do charts but make the colors your own: 1) one resolution per slide 2) each game is a chapter 3) making sure to list test hardware and then I’d go beyond: 1) a range of test benches with common processor and RAM configs from the Steam hardware survey for a “so how well will this work with your hardware?” 2) wide and ultrawide resolutions for those of us playing on 21:9 and 32:9 monitors 3) more explosions
NJ Jay, I personally really like the charts. Having the nearest cards keeps the sample size more reasonable when considering purchasing power for consumers. Appreciate the content, keep it up!
I liked the way you did this, what would be cool, is to transition/flick out the stuff below, moving the in focus card to the top, expanding underneath with data from 8 x cards that ppl might currently be on, maybe significant entries from prior generations, to convey whether it might be the right time to upgrade.
I like how you've set up the data here. Finding what is closest and what is above and below it at the price point matters more in trying to pick a card than comparing each card to the greatest each side has to offer every time. Knowing it's th emiddle of the pack of data means I don't have to constantly figure where it's being put and keeping the RT without AI boosted features is a great way to show the real value of the raw potential of the card outside of the software. I'm actually liking the charts as they are now.
In Australia, the 7900 gre is going for $899, amazing value compared to the 4070 which goes for ~$1000, and a 7900gre system will cost ~$150 more than a 4060, which is a very good value
I always found the FPS to Dollar ratios the most interesting. Makes it really hit home how small some of the differences that appear huge when the money is taken into account.
I'd love to hear some mention of efficiency, like performance per Watt. Total cost of ownership is typically not taken into account in hardware reviews, with only purchase price attracting attention.
New chart with "best neighbors" is a pretty good idea and I don't recall seeing it on other channels (but I dont follow a gaziliion as well). One thing that would speak more to me and probably many people, if I were on the market to change, could be to have a recap, like an average fps mix but in percent. The main tested card would always have a value of 100% for the three resolutions, and other cards would have like 113%, 89%, etc. That way you quickly see the differences in terms of average oerformace and compare that to the prices.
It would be nice to have more fixed reference points in the charts. So in this instance you could keep the GRE in the middle, then choose a card to always keep at the bottom and one one at the top, or just 2 other “reference” cards that are important for the comparison and that would help the viewer follow along the various tests
Feedback : I appreciate the sorting by 1440p/4k, it's much more valuable. I prefer keeping the same cards in the graphs however. Most useful for me is comparing the 4 cards above and below in terms of price at time of review ( new and used cards if the used card is still competitive). Keep up the great work!
![Natanael Cano - Amor Eterno [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EO4prCs6WpM/mqdefault.jpg)
Just a quick correction, the 7800XT debuted at $499 not $599 and i misspoke about the 4080D when it was a 4090D. Regardless of the misspeaks the charts still show a huge value for this card! Sorry for the numbering mistakes!
green for nvidias, red for amd and yellow for the Gre, just a recommendation
The million $ question in the holy books of Gaming ... Can it Run crysis ?
@JayzTwoCents: You're getting up there so your "misspoke" may be age related. ;) Welcome to AARP!
@@DIYTech21my gt630 ran crysis 2 on 20fps lol, good times
Wish these prices we similar in sweden, but they're waaay off. Oh well i've been getting used to it by now.
So many good value cards, are terrible value here. And the cards that should be good value cards, are overpriced. We never woke up from the covid/crypto era. :|
One thing no one ever seems to mention is with Nivida's 4000 series you either have to buy a new PSU that comes with the 12VHPWR cable or use the 12VHPWR adaptor to power the card, if the card even comes with an included adaptor. Whereas the AMD cards still use 8 pin and don't catch fire unlike the 12VHPWR cable.
Yeah but that’s also condensed to just a percentage of 4090s each month
Tons of people mention the inconvenience of using the 12VHPWR cable/adapter. Yes, it has real issues, but there is no situation where you have to buy an entirely new PSU solely to power the GPU.
Up to the 4070 you can get a regular 8 pin model, use the adapter that comes free with _all_ 12VHPWR GPUs, buy a separate 12VHPWR cable compatible with any PSU, or choose an ATX 5.0 PSU in the case that you need a new PSU for your upgrade regardless.
Thanks for reminding me. I totally forget that’s the case. I’m glad there’s the option.
@@H.S03not true, if you don't have the right voltage/wattage cables you can have issues.
@@BeyondReasonableClout To specify, you can buy a 12VHPWR cable compatible with any PSU realistically used for a high tier GPU like this because there are multiple cable types, for multiple types of PSU.
The cable you need is listed on the PSU product info page. All you do is match the pin-out on your PSU to the 12VHPWR, and you can use that cable. So a compatible 12VHPWR cable exists for most PSUs, which is why I said it’s compatible with “all” as a general statement. Could have worded it better, but the overall point still stands.
can we please have chapter breakouts for these videos so we can reference stats later?? especially for reviews, it really helps when we want to reference performance from you!
Your eyes will never notice the difference in the stats anyway, that's why y'all want benchmarks so much.
@@barfo281 Quantifying specifications and performance is detrimental to any informed consumer, on any costly product.
@@goofballbiscuits3647 Unless you're running a rig with the same exact parts/specs as their test rig, the benchmarks are essentially meaningless, because you won't see the same numbers on your system.
And as I said, your eyes won't notice the difference alone.
Hardware Unboxed tested a 7900GRE card (twice) and didn't come to the same conclusion as this video (either time). It's all subjective. And of course, they tested a different brand GRE card, and their test rig had different specs, and they compared it to some different brands of 7800XT/7900XT cards, among others..
Use a drop down and just select nvidia problem solved
@@barfo281 If you didn't test your equipment, you don't know; you believe. Beliefs have no place in computer science.
If you add a vertical line to show where the centre card lands next to the others, it's more clear than just having them next to each other on the same chart.
Keep the centre card and it being a completely different colour, that's great and really visible :)
+1 on the vertical line only at 1440p. That way, it doesn't feel like a crossword puzzle.
I love the older generations being on these charts cause it allows us with older cards to know much better where we stand and weather or not we should consider upgrading.
I agree a popular and relevant older card should be on the list since it's very likely the masses out there are still using them. While I have newer cards the one in the system i use daily is a 3060TI. When I eventually see a massive performance gain over it (2-3-400%) i'll be going hmm.. maybe it's time for a upgrade.
@@ChiBrianXIII so right, kinda mad at myself about this now lol
@@SonicAngel2020 edit it homie, lol. Usually I don’t auto correct someone, but I fully agree, but damn this killed me a bit and I’m looking out for you 😂😂😂😂. I’ll delete my comment prior though so I don’t get flamed
@@ChiBrianXIII not gonna delete it, I own up to my shit! 😂
Kinda sad u deleted it tho
@@SonicAngel2020 mofo, lol. I’m doing it because im a nice guy. What GPU you running right now anyway?
Hi Jay and team. The 7900 GRE Uses the bga and substrate of the Navi 32 die. (7700/7800). Hence the 90 degree offset silicon.
What offset? If they appear rotated that's down to web design
It's a Navi 31 chip, can't use another substrate. The Navi 32 substrate also has SMTs and SMDs on the upper part. It's not rotated 90 degrees, it's just how that picture was taken.
@@ReHWolutionit can use the same designated substrate, or well at least structure of Navi 32. This is one of the biggest reasons AMD went with chiplets, they can flip things around and create interesting products with far less R&D. RX 7900 GRE is basically a 7800 XT with crappier vram but a navi 31 gcd slapped in there.
@@roundduckkirathat's not how it works. Substrates are made for specific chips for a reason, and that is saving cost. It's nonsense using a more expensive substrate for a lower tier chip. In this case, being a Navi 31 XL chip, it cannot use a Navi 32 substrate, as the Navi 32 substrate doesn't have the same internal layout as the Navi 31 substrate. A substrate isn't just a piece of square silicon. It's a PCB interposer that manages all the electrical connections between a chip and the main PCB. A Navi 31 GCD is 50% bigger than a Navi 32 GCD, with way more electrical connections than a Navi 32 GCD. It would also defy the main purpose of the 7900 GRE/N31XL: saving money on defective Navi 31 chips. What's the point of re-using defective chips if you then have to engineer a different way to connect it to a PCB?
@@ReHWolution not if it's designed to be that flexible right off the bat, which is how it's been done with the Zen 2-4 eras of layouts where one normal chiplet can get replaced by an x3d chiplet or zen 2 and 3 can reuse I/O chiplets.
Finally ONE reviewer of them all that include 3090. You really are needed in Tech space Jay. Never change. Thanks!
One suggestion: Most of the tests are regarding gaming performance. There is a bunch of us who wants to see how gpus are performing in photoshop, premier pro, after effects, blender... so basically how they are compared for productivity work. Thanks
I grabbed a used 6800xt for $320 and scored a brand new EK block and backplate for $90. Has been a killer card for 1440p 144hz.
i got a 6950 last year for 600, this is about the same performance with lower wattage, but i dont see any reason to upgrade. probly wont til hopefully 9000 series
@@bradhaines3142 I got lucky with mine and it's been a great overclocking card too so underwater I'm getting some amazing performance for $400ish. If I ever jump to 4k 144hz I might upgrade but otherwise I'm gonna rock this thing for a while
I have the 6700 XT Red Devil which I got new at the end of last year for £430 and I have to say that I haven't been disappointed with it.
@@terminusaquo1980 I have a 6700xt before my 6800xt. It ran everything just fine at 1440p but I was wanted to do another custom loop so figured I should do a little upgrade before putting a block on
6800xt is even a beast at 4K I run a 6800 at 4K with no problem
I like the layout you've gone with having the review card in the #5 spot of 9 cards. The only addition I would like is to have the MSRP next to the cards names. I'm hearing you reference the MSRP difference between the cards, but it would be nice to be able to see it also.
I'm happy that you sorted the graphs for 1440p resolution - I feel like far too many reviewers STILL put entirely too much focus on 1080p results, when it's been long enough and cards have gotten good enough that 1080p shouldn't be the benchmark any longer. It doesn't really tell you much of anything any more - and in my opinion hasn't for quite some time. Especially considering 4K resolution is something manufacturers are targeting more and more these days, really 1440p should be the new minimum standard that everyone should be working at to get as good as current 1080p performance/quality is now at.
I very much agree w/ you.
A fair take. I mean, plenty of ppl do still use 1080p to game but if a benchmark reads 150 fps for 1440p you can get a good enough idea that the 1080p perf is going to be more than 99% of ppl will need or be able to make use of.
Otoh, me maining 3440x1440 I always find myself having to guess an approximate between 1440p and 4K (is that halfway between the two, 2/3's the way etc) which I'm kind of used to by now but it's still a little annoying.
im also done with nvidia, i already hovered over the buy button on the 7800 so this is very very welcome to have the 7900gre
You mentioned something that sparked a thought in my head about the charting.
Part of what I’d be looking for is a price to performance comparison at the point in time when you are doing the review. And something that could point me to the closest comparisons both in price and performance.
As an example if the chart was a graph centered on the card being reviewed and the x-axis was performance and the y-axis was price then plot the closest cards around it?
So top right is the faster but more expensive, and bottom left is slower but less expensive. And when you see stuff in the top left those are the cards that look way worse, and bottom right are the cards that are recommended instead of the card in the center?
Also I am not sure if there could be a shorthand way to include benchmark date, benchmark build version, gpu driver version, and windows version, and card cost at the time of running. As those are metrics that might be interesting to see if all runs over time increase in speed and it could be one of those other items that is doing it. Even an identifier that counted up whenever one of those variables changed so you could see if any two runs were at the same time and the other environment variables were the same?
Data analyst here 4:44 give your self some credit Jay, these visuals are pretty easy to digest. Your excel skills are above par with what we’d expect here in the corporate world!!!
Like the "Middle" concept for the comparisons. Thought it worked very well.
12:00 jay, ty for the new method of drawing a circle around the card and showing which cards land and where. it is MUCH better than the old way, im sorry because it seems like ALOT of extra work for you...
asalwaystyforyourhardworkanddedication!!!
We live in a world where a $550 card could be considered very good value😢
Inflation innit 😩
@@junko4166inflation this inflation that. It's always inflation.
And in 1937 a dozen eggs cost 37 cents and $2.51 in 2023.
@@brodriguez11000
What was the price of a decent graphics card in 1937? 😂
GPU prices are just insane now. But on the bright side the lower these new cards get the lower the previous gen GPUs get. Now you can find a 3070 or 6700XT for around $280 which are still amazing 1440p gaming GPUs
As someone who got the 7900 XT w/ the Starfield bundle when it launched, (which dropped the price tag to effective $650 for the GPU), it's nice to see the 7900 XT hold up in charts. I was able to get the price tag so low because I traded the game to a friend of mine since he wanted it anyway and while I'm sure I won't get such a good deal every time, it's good to take advantage of such a chance when it comes up.
The only reason people are jaded and don't care about cards is because the 2 big card companies making them have been pissing on their customers for so long.
You only say that you are very young and do not really know hardware history...
@@TriggernlfrlLOL, ok hardware guru! Yeah, my first dedicated video card was only the 3Dfx Voodoo 2. I've only built my own PCs since 1994, and my first PC was the C64, so I probably don't know the complete history of PCs. Maybe you "really" know hardware history, but what I'm talking about here is the current sentiment a lot of PC gamers have toward AMD and NVIDIA that's been continuously reinforced for the past 5 - 10 years. Maybe you're a crypto miner, and don't see things the same way, but historically speaking gamers were the original core customer base for this hardware, and these days they're an afterthought at best.
Went for this gpu with a ryzen 7700x.Great performance!
You saved me! I just ordered a 7800 XT and I didn't know about the existence of this 7900 GRE. Where I live, it's slightly more expensive and I can afford it. Thanks!
Set location for card reviewed is great. Making it a different color or outlined would make it stand out. Knowing which cards fall in that range is quite informative for me. It tells what other options you have if you don't choose that card.
And that just solidifies my GPU Choice... Was waiting to see if you would do a GRE review....Hellhound is 579 on Newegg right now. Sapphire Pulse is 549...Waiting for a call back from power color on if they have a Red Devil GRE coming out
I personally like the color shift
4070 super is the best card on the market for value right now.
Power consumption is of no concern but performance/$ is
i ordered the steel legend rx 7900 gre, my 1st AMD card, i went with it over the 4070 super because of the 16gb of V-ram & i don't care for ray tracing at all. Just tired of Nvidia right now, gonna dabble in team red for a bit until they release an "affordable" card that has more than 12gb of V-ram.
@robertkirk9631 the vram ram argument is moot considering the 12gb nvidia card has higher 1% lows than 16gb amd cards and can outperform with less vram. But you do you. The amd cards below the 7900xt are a waste of money
@@iequalsnoobdepends on your use case i suppose. Atleast i get good linux support with amd.
CGA color palette chart . Feeling nostalgic :-)
Hey Jay, I hope you're doing well. Id like to see the game mw3 or warzone included in the benchmarks. Thanks for all you do!
one thing I think a lot of people may enjoy seeing, is talking the average scores of all the FPS tests and then dividing that by the MSRP giving us a FPS per $1. So you would see something like:
3080Ti 1080p (avg): 156 @ $2.50/FPS
7950XT 1080p (avg): 230 @ $0.75/FPS
etc.
It would really hammer home the actual "Value" of the card. PS - as a data guy, I would have so much fun with your charts! I love paying with them, it is my job too.
I always thought that was a great metric on a comparison chart!
@@volkskrieg8735 I think he means the 7900XTX lol
@@volkskrieg8735 not if he thinks the 7900XTX should've been called the 7950XT
The trouble with $/fps charts is that you could get budget cards outranking flagship cards on the table, so that could be confusing to some people without proper explanation.
it gets messy quickly as you would also have do charts with power consumption and power consumption depending on energy prices like gamers nexus did in video about CPU efficiency.
Theres wild differences nowadays like 4080 vs 7900XTX can be 200w difference in really extreme and rare scenarios (low demanding games like ow2)
The chart format is good to show that specific cards relative performance, and where it lands.
But what I like with "conventional" charts that have the same cards on every page is that you can use them for comparing the performance of the the other cards as well, and not just the one being reviewed.
I use that quite often by looking up reviews of a newer card than the one im interested in. That way I can see how it performs against a card that wasn't available when it was reviewed first.
yeah, the idea of the relative performance is great but the closest rival in price card needs to be on the chart. Whether its lower than the last card or higher the fastest card. Its the competitor
1:28 7800xt launched at $499, not $599
I swear this channel is going down hill. It's all over the place
@@emmabentley7945 im sure jay is more concerned about his health rather than the channel
@@SkoomaChugger yeah but that doesn't excuse letting shit content through. He has two employees who are very smart and capable, they can absolutely be proof reading/watching. And if they aren't enough he could absolutely hire a third person to check over stuff.
I mean look at the ram video, that was such a bad video. How that ever made it out of the studio boggles my mind
@@BigMan7o0 not really shit content its still informative, and if you guys think you know everything then why watch? hmmm?
@@emmabentley7945 that hair line is all over the place
I really loved that you included less. So many have so much data on the page and then rush through it. This was nice to see where the "comparatives" are. Maybe if you categorized instead by all within a similar price range, that would have been even nicer. Like "all cards thing $100 of this card" type of deal. And the colors didn't bother me, but I'm not colorblind so I can't speak to that.
Jay, the chart presentationw as really useful. Nice work!
Im so glad you're comparing cards within their "skill bracket" so to speak. Now it's not just a chart showing us how poor we are and how good the most expensive card is by comparison. You held my attention with these comparisons much longer and I appreciate the value that brings to the channel
Exactly, no one else really focuses on this 💯💯
Hey Jay, the hellhound isn't MSRP. It's $580. Also I like the style of charts you used in this video. 👍
even so, it really doesnt change anything... its still cheaper then 7800xt launch price and cheaper then 4070
@@aiwoor The launch price of the 7800xt is $500.
@@aiwoor 7800xt launched at 499, idk what you are smoking.
@@aiwoor 7800 xt at launch was 499 wasn't it?
In theory you couldn't ever find it at 499
I like just having 9 GPU's in the graphs. Some channels clutter their charts with dozens of devices which makes them really hard for me to follow.
u can still pause the video. lol.
i mean, only showing comparable devices is definitely gave better picture than lots of GPUs that are either too high or low the stack to the reviewed product.
@@alrecks619 sometimes people want older stuff on the charts to figure out how much of an upgrade the reviewed part would be to what they have now. It's not just about what a part is competing with.
Other than the jarring colors this chart style makes the most sense in presenting the performance differences.
@@chaon93 For anyone upgrading it would not make any sense to upgrade from a 6800 XT to this GRE...however if you had a 5700 XT then this card would be a great upgrade even though you are spending $100 more than the MSRP of the 5700 XT was. So for $100 higher MSRP you more than double your performance since the 7900 GRE is 221% faster than the 5700 XT. This makes no sense for anyone with a 6700 or 6800 XT as an upgrade. As hardware unboxed found most people upgrade every 2-3 generations. I have a GTX `080 so once the 6900 XT drops to around $250 I will upgrade.
I feel like we are getting to a point where 1080p performance probably should be dropped.
Right because f people with 1080p monitors.
I've observed that the gaps close significantly during 4K..
Can we just all agree that the best graphics card right now for a gamer for price is 6950xt.
I would say yes, and upfront its pretty good.
However, if you add in energy bills over its lifetime, it will hurt your wallet pretty bad
Got mine about a year ago, very happy with it.
Yep 6950 is it
It was. Not now.
I almost got one but got the saphire plus nitro 7900 xtx for $800 on sale
I like the 3 separate bars for averages of each resolution, but I'd like if there was a 1% low indicated on each bar as well. I value stability as much as raw performance.
1080p is irrelevant at the price - I'd recommend simply dropping that resolution.
I recommend that he not. I bought a 7800XT specifically to try to max gains at 1080p from my old 5700XT. 7700XT didn't have enough VRAM for the period of time I need this for. 7600XT was too slow. I already push 12+ gigs of VRAM on this card on DX11 games from 2020 with no raytracing. How about he just drop what you're buying for instead?🤷♂You seem to have your hands full trying to screw actual buyers like me over to use this presented data lmao.
Clearly you're not aware of the 300+ hz 1080p display...
Like the graphs. Having the 4 above and 4 below makes it super easy to see how the performance lands. Nice job.
For me the ideal way to do "price based" benchmarks like this one is to do the model above & model below & equivalent from the other company (or 2) with maybe a further lower and/or higher tier card for scaling.
The 7900GRE was available in OEM form in Australia & in a few EU countries in DIY form at a ~$649 price so to me the $549 is a price cut & relaunch.
I just got the RX 7900 GRE Pure OC and my oh my what a card for the price. My first ever high end card and I'm happy and my daughters too cause they have dad's old RTX 2070 super in their rig. Win win :)
Based dad
Can you adopt me?
My 7900 GRE just came in yesterday, loving it so far. Upgraded from an XFX 5700 to this XFX 7900 GRE
Jay, you asked for feedback on your charts. The only glaring issue I see is that you don't include 1% Low FPS numbers alongside the averages. Having a smooth gaming experience is extremely important to me, and the 1% Low numbers are the only real way to check those. Thanks! ⭐⭐
Other than the colour change, I think having the RRP at launch on each card would be beneficial. As it is difficult to remember the prices for multiple generations at launch. And that way (to me at least) it would show how close the tested card is to other price ranges since the charts are not organised by price now. Hope that makes sense.
Agree 100%
This highlights how out of line the cards above this are. $50 between the 7800xt and 7900gre. Another $50 to the 4070 super. Then big jumps for small gains to the 4070ti super and 7900xt.
Would love to have one or two of the lower end cards on there 2000, 3000, from Nvidia, and 5000 series from AMD. They don't need to be discussed at all but it gives those that are still holding out in that category to see the difference from what they are using to what is being shown. We all know they are upgrades, but just how big and where that point is that you just really need to finally make a move is super helpful.
I think that your chart idea that you're using is actually really great. It keeps things relevant. The one thing that I would change about it is that I would add pricing to each card to really show how good (or bad) the value of the card being reviewed is.
Thx for the vid👍. I'm colorblind and don't care what colors you use, and I like this format for charts. Call it a Dartboard Chart: what's around the target.
In Canada, the 7900xt starts at $1100CAD, the 7800XT is $680-$780CAD and the GRE is $750-$760. I'm getting one now B4 they jump in price.
I love the idea of the card being tested being right in the middle of the chart compared to comparable cards. These charts were the most useful to me out of all the charts I have seen so far. Thank you for this video.
The card being reviewed and a different color all in the middle of the sheets. I LOVE that!!!
I'm going to be building a second PC here soon and the 7900 GRE is a no-brainer. The closest Nvidia card is the 4070 Super, which is ~$50-80 more expensive on Newegg.
Closest? They are neck and neck, and in raster 7900 GRE comes on top and obviously 4070S in raytracing. 7900 gre can do 4k as well, and it can do decent ray tracing, too. I like the 7900 GRE better because of the 16gb Vram. If the 4070S had 16gb vram, it would be a no-brainer. Plus, DLSS and FSR3 are both pretty good it all depends on how sensitive you are. I can't see the difference, but I do need glasses for far away objects, so maybe I can't see the finer details that well.
As a content creator I was thinking you were using screen recording for the switch to the computer screen and then I noticed Jay's fingers in the lower right corner... Talk about a well thought out workflow!
I like this method, would like the cards around the gaming benchmarks to be near the pricepoint.
I like the way you presented the data in this video. I think it is way more usefull than the usual comparison to the top dog GPU.
Do it by price point.
$500 card - compare against +\- $200 or whatever makes sense. It will lock the cards and give value propositions.
Id like to see more charts with ultrawide settings.
LOVE THE GRAPHS!
keeping the review card in the middle makes comparing from chart to chart so much easier
& the focus on 1440p makes total sense with bottlenecks and resolution trends
Also, as an analyst myself... simpler is often better, don't make the charts too "busy" since the human brain can't comprehend more than ~7 pieces of information at a time
- MattsTwoCents 😛
this will be a huge upgrade from my 6700xt. One thing I'd love from the graphics card videos so I do not have to hop around from content creator to content creator is at the low end what cpu's won't bottleneck it. going from low to high, idk for me maybe others I try to go mid to high tier every 2-4 years but CPU tends to be every 5 years or so for an upgrade unless necessary. Im running a Ryzen 7 5700x currently because i have AMD AM4 X570 ATX gaming motherboard. Or maybe i just need to research more to fully understand myself where the bottlenecks happen, idk. just a thought
AMD gpus will do better compared to nvidia when cpu bottlenecked since they have a hardware scheduler while nvidia does it on the CPU. A 5700x will do just fine, but a 5800x3d would be a nice upgrade especially with a faster card.
Would u say a R9 5900x with a RX 7900 GRE would do good?
@@PineyJustice
The charts are good.
Maybe stack them by performance (from worse to better) and put the 1% and 0.1% lows on the charts (I think the 1% low is very important).
Also, is good to see several GPU's compared on the charts, it's easy to have a good look on the options this way.
Pretty close to double the performance of the consoles with plenty of vram. Would be great to see it at $450-500. And bring back the 6700 xt at
Outside the colors (that can't matter less to me, haha), I like the approach of "+/-4 cards to the current one" on the new charts.
Cards that appear on a chart but no on the other can be somewhat calculated and that way we have more info without filling the screen.
You can get this card for 499 now. It's the best card per performance for the money. It preforms close to $900-$1000 dollar cards for half the price. It's 15-20fps better than the 7800XT for the same price. It's a no brainier. The Asian market card basically cut the thorat of the 7800Xt there is no reason to buy this card as long as the GRE is available.
The 7900 GRE seems more like a true successor to the 6800XT than the 7800XT....
Hey @JayzTwoCents, Just a Heads up Jay, 2:43 Here where you were speaking on the Die being arranged differently, well if you look closer to the diagram Picture, it shows you the little arrow in the top left corner, on the Die itself, for how you would install it, on the RX 7900 XT card on the right, and the RX 7900 GRE'S Die in the bottom left that little arrow is is in the bottom left, so they may not be the same, But the picture is wrong anyway. whoever took the pictures to make that post, didn't place it correctly for the photo! Hope this Helps ya Buddy! Thanks so much for all you do Jay, you and tour team are Awesome and are so helpful, with all your awesome videos! Keep up the Awesome Job man, I watch you a lot!
Starfield, Helldivers 2, Cyberpunk, Far Cry 6. The main titles that should be considered when running benchmarks due to older games are sometimes suited better to the older architecture. It is just nice to see how the older cards hold up to the newest cards in games that are new or constantly being updated.
Those colors literally remind me of changing the background menu color in final Fantasy 7. Brings me way back lol.
You know, that way of organizing the charts by 1440p. It makes it easier to see the averages for a rough estimate.
Edit: Also, a 4th bar for price to performance.
I really like this performance based chart method I wish more reviews used this
Don't stress about the colours on the charts Jay, both the layout of the graphs and your narration are absolutely spot on. Yet another awesome video, keep it up brother.
Our best wishes for your health and we hope that you're feeling better - Australian Nerd and Geek Community.
Nice way to present it, makes easier to understand what the graphics is competing with, the colors are not that bad. I think 5 above, 5 below would make more sense, I would also put 4k first 1440p second and 1080p last (maybe consider removing 1080p at all, most tests report too high FPSs and this makes the reading harder, and sometimes weird because of the huge bars).
Please, after AMD fix the driver, test a overclocked version of this card like the Saphire Nitro+, I think it will close the gap to the 7900 XT even more.
Never give the green to the green.
Sadly in the the UK the 7900 Hellhound Gre is £849.00 which is only £40 less than the 4070ti super tuf. Bit of a shame as it makes it less of a bargain and more and more graphics card are all around the same price making it very confusing. Still a good video looking at the benchmarks as it does show how well it performs.
I would like to see at least 4 or 5 different products from latest generation for each manufacturer. Then probably show only last 2 generations with lesser amount of product from older generation.
Example: 7900XTX, 7900XT, 7800XT, 7700XT, 6950XT, 6900XT and 6800XT for AMD side and RTX4080 Super, RTX4080, RTX4070Ti Super, RTX4070Ti, RTX4070 Super, RTX3090, RTX3080Ti and RTX3080 for 7900GRE comparison.
Price per FPS is a very good way to show the best bang for buck item. If I'm not in a tight budget I can simply check where the card stands in competition and if I'm I can simply check which mid range product makes more sense.
Also for presentation we always recommend people to use dfifferent main color bases like orange from red, light blue from blue and grass green from green colors for triple data sets. Then you can simply make benchmarked card as white or black and you can make your charts shine.
So as far as colors on the chart, this isn't absolutely needed, but color temperature based on performance per dollar would be nice compared to the baseline card. Such as green for a better cost/performance and red for a poor. And a gradient between?
I always struggled to read these data sheets but this way was actually a lot more comprehensible for me to understand. I think if anything, making the card being reviewed more obvious in some way would make it that much better.
The new Avatar Frontiers of pandora has a pretty awesome benching suite. Nice modern and pretty hard to run game as well. Should hold up the the future quite nicely.
So it would be awesome to see that included!
Thanks for all your hide work. Wishing you good health 😊
Im diggin the pink/blue/purple retro synthwave vibe!
For people wanting to get the GRE keep in mind the clock speeds listed for each, some have a drastically overclocked boost and base clock and those might get even higher FPS.
Charts were fine. As long as they are clear and easy to differentiate. They were. This card looks well worth considering.
I like the layout of these charts, only addition I'd like to see is the current pricing listed for the cards as well. When we start seeing last gen cards it's tough to evaluate based on these charts whether or not the current gen is worth it from a price perspective
For the graph bars, I'd suggest some consistent coloring (would say red for AMD, green for Nvidia, but probably need other colors to avoid colorblind issues). Card under examination is "brightest" shade of color, with same-gen cards being slightly darker shade, and older generations of cards being darker shades (neon green for current card under review, bright-green for same-gen, mid-green for 1 gen back, dark green for 2 gens back, etc.).
9:49 this is specifically among the reasons why I appreciate your channel, Jay. No bullshit, no fuss no muss. You show straight numbers and the numbers are true.
Them boosting their numbers to make it look better by pushing DLSS and all that BS pisses me off. I will *never* use them, so I want to see what the cards to *without* it, and you do that.
If the card can't perform good without DLSS, it needs to be reevaluated
For the charts, I like the fact that you put more cards on them to really see where the cards land in terms of performance. But I found it hard to follow the price/performance if that make sense. I think either : 1. 2 chart per tests, one with near performing cards whatever MSRP (with MSRP written under the card name) and one with same MSRP whatever performing. Or 2. A chart with near performance (with MSRP written under the card name) but class by MSRP rather than FPS. Personally I think the 2nd option would be great to builders, especially new ones, to know what they get for the money.
I like the way you produced the charts here. It's more digestible than a chart with every GPU ever.
This is actually something I'd like to see in some kind of database (Thanks Steve) where you could pick a GPU and view its nearest 'rivals' in various benchmarks.
The GPUs don't change all that much: The 7900 XT, 7800 XT and 6950 XT, as well as at least 2 of the '4070' SKUs are in almost every chart, so it's reasonably consistent.
I would maybe add the approximate current pricing (from Newegg or Amazon maybe) to the Y-axis alongside the model of GPU. In a chart that is comparing the closest competition in performance to a given GPU, surely then the most important thing is the price of those GPUs?
I like that you included a mix of GPUs from AMD and nVidia. Many reveiewers don't mix them.
I just built a 7800X3D, 7900GRE, B650E rig. $350 CPU, $550 GPU, $200 motherboard. For the money this rig screams.
What Res?
@@EldenLord00 3440x1440 OLED
@@Ramshackle6984 damn!! Enjoy that Oled. Beautiful pic. You get a lot of frames with that setup?
Hey Jay, a little feedback regarding the charts.
I think the format is good aside from the colors.
Would be nice if you would present 1440p and 4k individually or after another so we are not bombarded with a screen full of numbers.
Otherwise great video!
Also greetings from Germany, loving your videos since 2018
So I’d start with a copy of Steve@GN on how to do charts but make the colors your own:
1) one resolution per slide
2) each game is a chapter
3) making sure to list test hardware
and then I’d go beyond:
1) a range of test benches with common processor and RAM configs from the Steam hardware survey for a “so how well will this work with your hardware?”
2) wide and ultrawide resolutions for those of us playing on 21:9 and 32:9 monitors
3) more explosions
NJ Jay, I personally really like the charts. Having the nearest cards keeps the sample size more reasonable when considering purchasing power for consumers. Appreciate the content, keep it up!
Literally this. As someone with a 2070 for the past 5 years this is really tempting even if rx 8000 is coming relatively soon
I liked the way you did this, what would be cool, is to transition/flick out the stuff below, moving the in focus card to the top, expanding underneath with data from 8 x cards that ppl might currently be on, maybe significant entries from prior generations, to convey whether it might be the right time to upgrade.
Nice video. Make the background color black and swap the 1080p and 1440p colors and the vidwo would be really nice
nice to see jay bringing in some data in a style closer to what steve does
I like how you've set up the data here. Finding what is closest and what is above and below it at the price point matters more in trying to pick a card than comparing each card to the greatest each side has to offer every time. Knowing it's th emiddle of the pack of data means I don't have to constantly figure where it's being put and keeping the RT without AI boosted features is a great way to show the real value of the raw potential of the card outside of the software. I'm actually liking the charts as they are now.
In Australia, the 7900 gre is going for $899, amazing value compared to the 4070 which goes for ~$1000, and a 7900gre system will cost ~$150 more than a 4060, which is a very good value
Where’s the 7800xt 4K fps bar ? The colours aren’t bad though just the 4K purple is a bit dark and obviously darker on the 7800xt 😅
I always found the FPS to Dollar ratios the most interesting. Makes it really hit home how small some of the differences that appear huge when the money is taken into account.
I'd love to hear some mention of efficiency, like performance per Watt. Total cost of ownership is typically not taken into account in hardware reviews, with only purchase price attracting attention.
New chart with "best neighbors" is a pretty good idea and I don't recall seeing it on other channels (but I dont follow a gaziliion as well).
One thing that would speak more to me and probably many people, if I were on the market to change, could be to have a recap, like an average fps mix but in percent. The main tested card would always have a value of 100% for the three resolutions, and other cards would have like 113%, 89%, etc. That way you quickly see the differences in terms of average oerformace and compare that to the prices.
It would be nice to have more fixed reference points in the charts. So in this instance you could keep the GRE in the middle, then choose a card to always keep at the bottom and one one at the top, or just 2 other “reference” cards that are important for the comparison and that would help the viewer follow along the various tests
Feedback : I appreciate the sorting by 1440p/4k, it's much more valuable. I prefer keeping the same cards in the graphs however. Most useful for me is comparing the 4 cards above and below in terms of price at time of review ( new and used cards if the used card is still competitive). Keep up the great work!