@@DragonOfTheMortalKombat I don't think blaming the devs here is correct, atleast not in every case. From what I'm seeing publishers gain the most with upscaling, framegen and so on, they can release even more unfinished games earlier.
@@MrJohannson How is it fake frames ? i understand the latency part, but u actually gain a boost in ur framerates. idk why people still keep saying '' fake frames ''
Ok, let's summarize: The 7900 GRE with 80 CU is 8-10 % faster than the 4070. The 7800 XT with 60 CU is 17% faster than the 4070. Sounds like they are creating miracles at AMD.
@@tomtomkowski7653 I wouldn't say they are strictly worse. Take into account the new architecture that's more efficient and is on a smaller node. If you just look at the funky numbers, then yeah, the numbers on 7800 XT are smaller, but to say it bluntly, every single one of these numbers is more performant than these on 6800 xt. I would say it will be close in performance with a slight edge to 7800 xt.
@@mirraczeThis is exactly what happened with the 6700xt, given enaugh time the 7700xt can become the king of value, only uncertainty is how future proof 12gb can be
@@mirracze $400 really isn't unrealistic in this case. The 7700XT at its current price makes no sense compared to its big brother. Like Vex said, it's almost certainly a play to get people to shell out the extra $50 for the 7800XT, then drop the 7700's price once that market is saturated. They did the same thing with the 7900XT and you saw how fast that dropped from $900 to $750, sometimes even lower on sale.
AMD doesn't want you to buy the 7700XT, but rather opt for the 7800XT for $50 more. Once stock of the 7800XT starts to drop i would thik that they will drop the price of the 7700XT
If AntiLag+ is even close to as good as reflex, that’ll make these RDNA3 cards even more attractive. Driver level FSR3, if good, would also be a good bonus for them.
Yeah, 6700 XT launched at $479 MSRP, which was a poor value at the time, considering that the 3070 was just 20 bucks more, but over the time, that kinda shifted to another direction it dropped down to about $320-$350. You shouldn't really trust MSRP to the fullest, it's only what the manufacturer recommends the price should be, but the real price is getting dictated by the demand of customers.
I think the real issue is they probably don't want to sell that many 7700xt. It is probably I failed 7800xt they cut down. My guess is they don't have that many fails so they are upselling.
I feel like the 7800xt was supposed to be the 7800 and the 7900 GRE was supposed to be the 7800xt, so to me, the naming doesn't really make a lot of sense given the overall specs, but if the performance is as good as they say, then the pricing on that one is actually sort of good? It feels weird to say that about any current gen cards, but it might really be true. Of course, it's out of my budget but it's still nice to see the change. Now, the 7700xt...that's a different story. The pricing just doesn't make any sense at all, which really sucks because if it were actually launched at $400, then I might strongly consider expanding my very limited GPU budget to get it...though even then I'd likely wait and see if it dropped to somewhere between $350-$375 range, which still leaves some room for a 7700 or a 7600xt, especially if they come to their senses and further reduce the 7600 a bit more as even though it is a better price than they first planned on, it's still a bit overpriced for what it is and how it performs..sure, compared to the NVIDIA offerings, it's not as bad, but in reality, yeah, still a bit overpriced at the $270 range currently... Just my rambling 2 cents. It's cool if others disagree with me. I'm hoping to see some price drops from AMD at least to bring a few of their lower/mid tier cards into a better range for everyone. Let's face it, a lot of us are struggling with the price gouging on rent, groceries, utilities, etc(you can say inflation, but when entire industries are reporting record profits and record margins, it's price gouging)...so we just can't really afford overpriced GPU's so we're looking more and more at the used market or the still available new options from the AMD 6000 series.
Perhaps they will release XTX versions that are XT. It indicates AMD is targeting efficiency . If they market this way it's saying: we want the performance chip to be a bit faster but have the memory performance you'll need for like 4 years. For $500 is it great? Who knows. It'll use less power which means less issues keeping things cooled down. It may be a warranty cost savings. There's a lot of points to AMD's internal reasoning that we have to extrapolate here imho but if you want my take: The 4060Ti 16gb and 7800XT will age alright. We probably will see a wall with graphics for a while anyway and in 4 years these will just seem expensive and a bit slow compared to whatever the better rast. GPUs do in the future. The R9 290 had 4gb of GDDR5 in 2013 and it gamed fine for 5 years even playing RDR2 in low settings. I have a feeling they will stick on the 16gb cards for a while. Lateral upgrades with better rast and more software features. Both Nvidia and AMD. But once Nvidia makes a big mistake it will likely be taken over by AMD hailmary like Ryzen. I think AMD is taking over in gaming in a slow but steady way. Who knows what their holdbacks to higher memory cards are but my guess is the price of 2gb chips and the lack of desire to design huge boards with cheaper options. The Ps5 and console lifecycle is watched closely and the notebook segment is always a concern. Getting 12gb will probably be standard in many of the expensive notebooks on the VRAM side. Interesting times in the GPU world but I think Amd made a smart move. They can make the XT card their midrange offering while making the not XT obviously a lesser GPU. Then the XTX can be traditional AMD. Card reliability will be better this way and I think it will build reputation. These 7800XT are less likely to have issues than if they were massively more powerful and sipping electrons like crazy. They just look like the start of a new generation in graphics cards. We are maybe a few years from a new "Pascal" type card if it will ever exist again. Nvidia lost a lot of money because of the 10 series but also built a reputation around it for years, mostly on the backs of AIBs they snubbed by bringing in their own manufacturing processes from enterprise cards to the Founders cards. It was non-competitive. Furthermore, this input lag trend is going to end. It's just a better illusion than that old gimmick 3D Vision from Nvidia or whatever that was. And how G Sync was the big scare for about 2 years because the Hulk marketing machine is good. I doubt AMD cares about FSR as a technology and that is actually what I want to see. If DLSS dies out and AMD makes FSR the "my GPU is a bit old and need help" feature it was supposed to be originally. People forgot this. Anyway if they're rid of this obligation to match Nvidia it will ground studios that publish dishonest products. Sometimes not the devs fault, sometimes the whole thing is a bit moldy. I look at the bright side here. AMD is tidying up and marketing pretty well in the long run. When the 8800xt and 9800xt are a thing, everyone will think back to the 8800GTX from Nvidia that used to run Crysis in 720p at like... whatever FPS paired with a Core Duo. But it won't be a card prone to problems and it may signal the lack of FSR development = huge growth in AMD driver development speed. If they start matching Nvidia without all the need for accounts, email logins for GeForce profiles. Anyway DLSS and it's forced rival FSR are not good for gaming . Let's hope Starfield is at least as good as Fallout 4 and feels like it's from 2018. It probably will, just like Fallout 4 felt mostly outdone visually by games like Crysis 2 and BF3 which were earlier titles. I'd expect that from Bethesda but like RDR2 and Skyrim, it ends up being fine because however they program the games they handle mods well despite engine limitations. In the future Starfield will look still like a modern game if you have 2026 hardware for example. Let's hope this card sell well and AMD has some widespread success. It would be a relief
same price, same performance, same power usage as $520 6800xt - it doesn't sound good at all. Not to mention that the 7800xt has worse specs (fewer CUs, less L3 Cache) than the 6800xt. To make it a really good deal this card should be named 7800 and should cost $450.
@@tomtomkowski7653how can you say same performance when the 7800xt is allegedly 17% faster than the 4070* which is slightly faster than the 6800? You're getting a new card, which performs better at a lower price.
@@tomtomkowski7653 Except they won't use the same power. If a 6800xt says it's using 280w it's actually using 360w, ALL RDNA2 cards only monitor core power, they do not take into account the power draw of the vram or losses in conversion from 12 to 1.2v, these losses can be somewhat significant, at full draw anywhere between 30w and 80w just for conversion loss, that's why the mosfets have heatsinks. RDNA 3 reports total card power.
The most interesting thing is that because the 7000 series has DisplayPort 2.1 universally (AIB allowing), when Fluid Motion Frames is released you'll see more of those frames (generated or not) at higher resolutions, at least with compatible monitors. Its a very small benefit, (im not lying about the impact) but it atleast seems like AMD had plans to be able to do as such with AFMF.
I can already get 240 fps at 1440p with displayport 1.4. That is definitely already enough for me, but I guess this could actually matter with a 4k 240 hz monitor.
The 7800XT with Starfield (Premium Edition) is an awesome win for consumers now ….. and with FSR3 (and all its associated features) coming in the near future AMD may offer the mid range customer sone vg value and performance 😱🤯🥳🥳🥳
I choosed rdna2 over Ampere, but back in the day companies were making real generational improvements. Now it's just cut down products replacements. Maybe with rdna5 or rtx6000 something change and i will upgrade again.
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT, that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has. If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
@@syncmonism yes that's exactly what i also think about this, right now my _XFX Merc Black rx6750xt_ it's performing 1-2avg fps less than rx6800 in any 1080p game and on pair with an rtx3070ti (when it's not slowed down by the 8GB of vRAM) in 1440p. I won't use RT even if i had any of these GPUs i'm matching. The rx7700xt it's performing exactly like my card (1-2% better in the best case scenario), according to AMD recent bench graphs released. The only things i did to my Radeon are: small undervolt, 2,8GHz overclock, maxed out vRAM sliders and Power Limit. For the 1st time in 20 years i bought a really good silicon so i'm aware that it's super rare to have my performance gains on other rx6750xt GPUs... But still rtx40 (below 4080) and rx7000 (below 7900xtx) are just replacements built to matching the performance tiers of previous gens at the price they sell today. edit: I really hope rdna5/rtx6000 will bring some real generational improvements, or intel ARC 3rd gen smashing the price/performance without the problems of ARC 1st gen.
All these announcements from Nvidia and AMD make me want to wait for actual testing before buying a new graphics card. For now I am sticking to my RTX 3060 that I have had since Dec. 2021. With luck I'll be able to use FSR3 with the RTX 3060 just by installing Adrenaline 🤪
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT, that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has. If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
There wasn't enough time to modify RDNA3, even a slight change to a wiring layer takes at least six months to verify and fab and the chips were probably made last year. The difference is in the size of the caches, L0 and L1 are double the size per WGP in the 7900 series. This will make a bigger impact on performance at resolutions higher than 1440p
Love my 6700 XT. 350 bucks. Free 100 game. 12GB of vram, 2400 mhz base clock, has a lil ray tracing if you wanna dabble in it. If you wanted the same thing from nividia youd have to spend at least 500 - 600 just to get the same. With nivida, its either lots or vram, slow clock speed/bus OR lots of Clock speed on a 256 bit bus, but with only 8gb of vram, if you want both, you must pay and arm and a leg, 3 house mortgages, and swimming pool, a red Mercedes convertible, and the neighbors dog...
According to some rumors it was supposed to be the 7800 without xt and the 7900 GRE was supposed to be the xt but the yields of 7900 xt were better than expected or sth like that.
According to sources, the silicon yield on 7000 series was better than expected. This means there's more chips that meet the standards for XT cards, and less to bin down for the non-XT. Because of this, they're giving less of a price break on the non-xt to push more demand up to the surplus of XT cards.
@@mirracze My last NVidia card was a 980, I got that used but even at MSRP it was $550. Inflation hasn't been great but double is a bit extreme. Of course we don't really even need to do that math, since NVidia has been kind enough to tell us outright that they're setting record profits despite sales numbers plummeting.
yeah but you probably had half the wage income than today when the 7970 was realeased. Also the 7970 is basically the same performance as the 5700g apu that only uses 65watts...So times change....
i feel like 7700xt's price has a main purpose of getting those people who were waiting on it to go "meh" and buy some of the overstocked lower 6000 series cards instead. then it will gradually lower over time. any upselling to the 7800xt is just a side effect of their real goal: getting rid of these old cards. obviously it's a pretty big issue, given they waited so long to launch these.
Mid range. It uses a mid-sized GPU. The GPU is named "Navi 32" and that is in-line with the 6700 XT's GPU naming of "Navi 22" from the previous generation. If you adjust for inflation, 500 USD today is equivalent to about 425 in 2020, when the 6800 XT first launched, and that's around 33% less than what the 6800 XT's launch MSRP pricing was. As such, the 7800 XT offers about a 50% performance per dollar improvement over the 6800 XT. The launch price of the 6700 XT was bloated, at 480 USD about two and a half years ago in early 2021. However, AMD was probably planning to launch it at around 400 to 430, until the GPU shortage messed everything up. Even if the 6700 XT had launched at the much lower price of 400 USD back in early 2021, the 7800 XT at 500 USD in 2023 would still be offering AT LEAST a 33% improvement in value per dollar now in 2023, if you properly account for inflation, and the fact that the 7800 XT has more Vram and some other improvements and features which come with the newer architecture adds additional value to the roughly 40% improvement in performance that the 7800 XT likely has over the 6700 XT. I'm assuming that the 7800 XT will have roughly the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT, maybe slightly worse.
Wouldn't be the first time they lie about performance chart. The one thing I can say whenever Amd do something good or bad nearly everybody try to spin it to look good or be optimistic. When nvidia do something good or bad nearly everybody try to spin it bad or be pessimistic. Most of the reviewers straight up ignore nvidia cards feature superiority. Ignoring frametime data with reflex vs antilag etc etc. I think they created a fan boy masses who easily fooled and never tried what nvidia has to offer in first hand experience only with youtube compression. Price/performance is not equal to price/value. Value cannot be measured while throwing out half of the product features set. The comparison is dead simple since Amd does not innovate and most of the time copy with subpar results. Its fine if you(generally speaking) do not want to pay for a better product but at least do not be ignorant or delusion about it.
First While I'm not the target market for the 7700 and 7800 as I already splurged and picked up the 7900 xt when it was on sale, I'm happy they're seemingly making an attempt at the lower end. *Hopefully* these slides are actually accurate this time though... Maybe they learned their lesson... We'll know soon. Not to mention the whole FSR3 stuff. Let them cook.
You say "let them cook" but having bought their current gen card makes your statement irrelevant. The only thing that matters in the end is your purchasing decisions. Everything else just boils down to that. It's a simple binary. From company's POV - Buy: Good. Don't buy: Bad. That's it. If you buy and then complain, who gives a damn? Just keep buying and complaining, nobody cares. The only way you could ever exert real pressure if you are not satisfied with the market is by not buying. If you buy, you're saying "I'm okay with this". Otherwise you wouldn't have bought. PS: if you feel that I misunderstood what you meant by "let them cook" then please explain it to me in more detail.
@@Humanaut. It's not that deep really. Was just hoping for the best for people who haven't bought and are looking too in this specific price segment. I want more people to be able to actually get in and pc game. Also, "let them cook" is just another way to say "let's see what they do". Which I think is a valid sentiment given how AMD enjoys fumbling the ball from time to time.
@@shortstaccck7965 well it is "that deep" if you're thinking about which market forces bring forth what outcomes. The outcomes that a consumer would want (reasonable price/performance) is not the same outcome a company that nearly has a monopoly would want (maximum profits). There is a power struggle, a constant tug of war going on between the duopoly and the consumer. If there was decent competition this wouldn't be the case - but there isn't. (Let's see what Intel/arc does next gen) The only reason consumers will ever get decent priced/performance in this mono/duopoly is if consumers refuse to buy until companies give in. There is no other alternative.
@@Humanaut. bro you took this way out of proportion and you can buy something off the promise of better performance thus not making it irrelevant if youve already purchased because you might still be waiting for the feature set and software sweet to complete its course when you buy into this generation of rdna 3 youd be buying into the idea of fsr3 hyper rx and fsr4 in the long run which is where the let them cook comes into play as they are literally whipping these software enhancements up in their lab now with that said trying to make it into one of those if you support you buy if you dont you dont buy arguments is entirely stupid because ppl buy what they can afford and what they think will work out better for them in the long run most ppl dont give af about being shills for one company over another but if the product has the features they want theyll buy it plain and simple period also buying something and complaining about its short comings is also how refinement and progress is achieved do you think ppl have no complaints about the rtx 4090 because they do and all those complaints will be sent towards the 5090 or whatever flagship they make next and they will be refined out so all in all your take is just a very simple minded limited view of what makes people actually buy pc components
@@syreemills1553 Nothing you said takes anything away from the points I made. The first point you made is summarized by the concept of future proofing. That is a debate in and of itself. Some elements of future proofing are valid (like more VRAM = more future proof), other elements are very questionable, like that future patches will deliver x% performance improvement or how you just don't know how good/bad fsr 3.0 will be or wether hyperrx will ever come out at all. But this is completely beside the point and a different topic. Yes people use many different metrics to come to a conclusion on wether or not a product is worth purchasing. That is self evident and never disputed. You are not the original author of the "let them cook" phrase (do you know how it is most commonly used?) - you just gave me your interpretation of it but not what it actually means. You can not separate price and quality of the product. If you buy a product for 100$ and then afterwards say it has flaws x y and z then the RnD department might or might not listen to your feedback for future iterations for improvement - you still said "this is worth 100$ the way it is right now", otherwise you wouldn't have bought it. Of course, just because it's worth "100$ right now" based on the fact that you paid that much doesn't mean that it will still be worth 100$ in 2 years if they don't improve or iterate. That's also self evident and not disputed. So, to get to the actual issue - people don't complain about Nvidia cards being bad per se, but they complain about THE PRICE being bad, because Nvidia literally named the 4050 a 4060 (this is proven by the hardware they used) and then charged 4070 prices for it. You can not talk about a card without talking about the price. For 200€ the 4060 would be a great card. For 300/400/500 it's not. So, you can either buy the card and complain about THE PRICE in which case your word had 0 value because you bought the card. Or you can not buy the card, reject the reconditioning of the market and then there is nothing more you need to do except watch the prices fall. Of course this only works on a collective level but a collective is nothing more than many individuals combined.
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation. Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounted 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has. If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
Doesn't make sense, this is 30% less specs than a 7900xt, which is 30% better than a 6800xt, meaning they are equal (and they cost the same), so no upgrade after 3 years
7800 XT is Navi 32 XT, a successor to Navi 22 XT (6700 XT). That's why it's not that big of a leap over the 6800 XT and also why it has a much lower msrp
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation. Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounted 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has. If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
The 7800 XT isnt actually gonna be 17 percent faster, its just marketing bs. Its likely to actually be only 5-10 percent faster than the 6800XT at best, but realistically even if it were 17 percent faster, the reason why it would be tech for tech performing better than the 7900’s, is because its probably not using chiplet design. Their MCM design is broken, and reason ive been saying nobody should be buying the 7900’s cause they run like garbage and super buggy c and just in general the architecture is awful and negates any advantages RDNA3 has over RDNA2 by moving to 5nm because of the introduction of so much lag.if i remember right, it was only the 7900’s that would have that and the 7600 XT itself also doesnt use MCM. Its also why the 7600 XT uses its own different drivers vs the 7900’s and why they take different times to release. This would also mean a big reason for the delay is cause they didnt know how to fit the 7800 XT into their price and performance stack, and needed to make sure it didnt make the 7900 XT useless. Im pretty sure if they did a “refresh” of both cards they would abandon the MCM and use monolithic and put out a card that wasnt as fast as A 4090 and ran hotter, but still got pretty close-ish and could charge a lot less for it. The 7800 XT seems like it could be a good alternative for the 4070, but its pretty damn late and the 6800 XT was already a good alternative if you didnt care about RT, worse efficiency, worse upscaling, worse encoding and streaming options. For those whole only cared about raster performance, i dont think anything changes here, especial if the 7800 XT drops the 6800 XTs price closer to $450
I recommend two of my friends to buy one . And if qny more of my friends want to buy a gpu in our region I still recommend 6900xt and 6800xt . Used , 6900xt are going for 300-350$ in here
I really hope this becomes popular, cause then it might incentivize their software development teams to give us drivers that don't crash certain games lol
I don't think it will be 17% faster either. But, even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation. Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen (with original launch prices) as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounts on the 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has. If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
Honestly, I feel like AMD was going to announce 550$ and 450$, but they saw all the people online saying if they priced the 60CU card over 500$ that nobody would buy it.
they've been taking so long with the 7800 and 7700 for two reasons 1. clearing out 6000 stock , and 2. they knew when they released this with it's performance in spitting distance of the 7900 xt , they are gonna have to drop price on the 7900xt to make it's price make sense. and in turn also drop the 7900xtx's price as well.
Apparently it was also because the board partners (many of whom also make and sell Nvidia and/or Intel cards), were not selling as many cards as they wanted, and the supply chains and retail channels were getting clogged with overpriced Nvidia cards which weren't selling, and so some of the board partners told AMD that they weren't ready to send out more new AMD graphics cards yet.
The 7700XT is simply there to look as being better value than nVidia. Think about it. It's exactly in the middle of the $400 and $500 price of the 4060Ti 8GB and 16GB cards respectively, while being faster. And then, for $50 more, you get significantly more performance. I don't think it's really an upsell tactic, but rather that yields are good enough that they prefer to push people to the 7800XT to avoid getting shortages of the 7700XT.
7800 XT is what a 7800 should have been (if there was one) 60 compute units. 7800 XT is just another refresh so it's basically a 6800 XT option for when the stock dries up. RDNA3 is a refresh gen. I see no point buying 7800 XT over used 6800 XT unless you really want a new card or are super skeptical about buying used.
You get driver support for 2 more years, you get guarantee, the 7800 xt has ai cores so can use the full hyoerx while 6800 xt for example wont have anti lag +, the gpu spends less power than 6800 xt, and also , is on rdna 3 which might improve in the future with new drivers. Yeah, same as 6800 xt.
I think it’s probably some logistical thing where they couldn’t stagger out the releases or hold off on the 7700XT. They’re basically sacrificing its launch reviews to give a clear signal to consumers they should buy off the rest of RDNA 2 stock if their budget is $400 or below. Once it’s gone I think it’ll go to $379-429 depending on the AIB.
I think Amd needs to Re-adjust Msrps of their Cards. Rx 7600 for $230-250, 7700xt for $380-400, 7800xt at $500, 7900GRe for $600, 7900Xt for $750, 7900xtx for $900.
@@halrichard1969 Seriously though, even if it's only the same standard raster performance of the 6800 XT, which I think it will be, that actually is still a big improvement in value over the LAUNCH MSRP pricing of the various 6000 series cards, especially if you account for inflation, which has been a LOT higher than normal over the past three years. Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation. Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen (with original launch prices) as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounts on the 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has. If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
Prices won't fall till all 6 series cards are gone.thats why prices are higher on 7900 and 7700. The parts that make the least sense when 6 series can slot in to fill the gap.
I don't think any 40 series card is worth it same goes for amd 7900xt and 7900xtx I think you should have gotten something used from the 30 series or 6000 series
@@killakame-3434 lmaoo "with fsr3" and yet people upvoted your comments its hilarous to me how many rampant amd fanboys are in youtube section, people have also said "4070 ti destroys 3090 using dlss3" but gets downvoted heavily, now just because amd did it its suddenly "look fine"
After the hype dies down for the 7800xt they’re going to drop prices for the 7700xt to 399 for sure. They want to upsell people on the better value and once those costumers are happy they’ll cater to the budget buyers and adjust the 7700xt’s price
i love 7800 xt.. i love the beautiful gift that AMD has given to all gamers with older graphics cards.. and I am determined that when I decide to do another build to replace the current one.. it will be totally AMD hardware
I did this back in December with an AM5 build. First one ever. 7900XT and a 7700x cpu with 32gigs of system ram. The world is right again and getting better. AMD Adrenaline software is a Dream to work with. Throw in a moderate OC to both the CPU and the GPU with undervolting and you get better performance with better temps and less power used. Whats not to like?
It's definitely not a gift, but it DOES look likely to be the best value card of this generation. Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation. Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounted 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has. If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
maybe I will sound a bit paradoxically, but you know who to blame for 7700XT and 7900XT pricing ? TSMC :) Their 5nm nodes are just too good, so almost everything they produce are full fleged chips. So AMD wanna sell them. Thats why it looked like AMD was telling you - dont mind 7900XT, just get the XTX and now the same with 7800 XT. I am not PC component engineer or something, but the math is pretty simple - you pay the same price in case of both of themn, minus: 4GB VRAM ( 37/4=about 9$ ? - there were rummors, that 16GB VRAM cost 37$, thats why the 37/4 math ), 1 less 6nm controler for the VRAM ( I really dont know how much that cost, 5$ ? ), few less capacitors and stuff in terms of powersuply ( 1-2 $ ? ), thinner radiator ? ( some cents ? )....... and you end up at what, 20 $ cheaper card ? and now you wanna position it competetively and not losing much ? Yeah... Not to mention that they probably really dont have many "deffective" N32s, so they would have to cut down some of the good ones to make enough these GPUs ( 7700XT ) it ppl wanna buy them. So, they did what was expected - they dont wanna you to buy it - buy 7800XT instead, izi. still, I am glad that atleast the 7800XT is priced very competitive.
Which is why they will lower 7700xt price in few weeks/months. When 7800xt will sit on shelfs for too long, AMD will be "forced" to "start" selling 7700xt
@@ladrok97 Ehmm... are you ok ? If the reviews will be atleast neutral for the 7800XT, they will not sit on the shelfs. If you red me properly, you should understand that AMD wanna you to buy 7800 and so they didnt produced too many 7700, cause its not too beneficial for them. So they will not need to reduce the price eitherway. Either is your logic strange, or you are some Jensen fan.
@@AdalbertSchneider_ Not everyone can spend 500$ on GPU. In Europe you need to add VAT (20% on average) and exchange rate. When a lot of 7800xt will sit on shelf, then AMD will be forced into reducing prices of 7700xt, because 400$ for GPU sounds less scary than 500$ Eventually it's more beneficial to sell products with worse margins than to sell nothing at all
@@ladrok97 bro, can you open your eyes agin ? the EU prices are 489 & 549 €. Thats how we in EU live - with VAT. So if you cannt aford 489,- € GPU, AMD has solution for you - 6700 XT, 6750 XT or an advice - save up a bit and buy later. Dont take me wrong, beofre I havent seen the performance slides, I also expected the 7700 to be at 400$.( so what, 440 € ? ). Yes, AMD is missing something to destroy 4060Ti, and they could have it. But sadly, they have not enough "that bad N32s" to make more of the 7700XT, let even what I would expect - 48CU 7700 nonXT for even cheaper. ( XT for 400 and non for 350+- would be a dream situation )
JUST A MOMENT...RX 7900 XT has 40% more cores (running at 10% lower frequency) than RX 7800 XT and is only 10% faster!? And the RX 7800 XT has 11% more cores and will be 33% faster than the RX 7700 XT (whose cores have a 5% higher operating frequency)... What!? There is something very strange to me...
That's at 1440p. The Navi 31 GPUs have double the L0 and L1 cache per WGP compared to Navi 32 so the difference will be bigger at 4K. The 7800 XT also has a 33% wider memory bus compared to 7700 XT and an additional cache die which also contribute to the difference
As much as AMD fumbled the bag on the RX 7700 XT, it was a good showing from them. The RX 7800 XT looks to be awesome value (gotta wait for reviews obvs) and FSR3 and driver level framegen via asynchronis compute is a damn cool feature. Competition is good! Now, let's see how Nvidia respond...
nvidia will not respond since they got everyone who use gpu for anything else besides gaming buying their gpu. They don't care about gamers who use their computer gpu only for gaming. They care about ia farmer and content creator, well if the price was lower but you get the idea.
@@aldofer8832 While I'm inclined to agree with you, MLiD recently put out a video where he claimed a source from Nvidia told him they're lowering the cost for AIB's on the 4060ti 16gb. The fact it's the 4060ti 16gb explicitly and not the 4070 and 4070ti is damn weird, that card is made for professionals on a budget (and is WAY overpriced). Of course, leaks, MLiD, take with a dump truck of salt. The reality is Nvidia are going to have to respond or suffer the consequences. We'll see what happens :)
@@aldofer8832 yep can confirm sometimes i wonder why some people pay top dollar gpu only for it to be "good" at gaming only while being shit at everything else and has horrible software support (totally not my critisim to amd)
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation. Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounted 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has. If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
@@anarchicnerd666 I mean I would agree but the reason why it's getting a price drop is mainly because professional even on a budget tend to prefer at least the 4070 and the 4060ti got bad review from content creator focus test and professional alike.
Nice Video, Good Topic. My take on this is that the 7900 series cards came at a much less stable time both for availability and pricing. I would have purchased a 7900xtx if I could have gotten one but had to settle for a $899 xt back in December. My whole PC would no longer function with stability for gaming. Barely for web surfing. Luckily coming from a $600 1080gtx I was astounded at my whole new AMD5 build performance. I still am. First all AMD build ever and its great. Now, the 7800xt is a different animal in a different time. Card availability is no longer an issue. Pricing is competitive, because it needs to be. Yes, AMD has had more time to make a more efficient card either thru drivers or hardware efficiency. More likely, both are factors. Slowly but surely AMD is learning how to not shoot themselves in the foot. Keep up the good work on your channel my young friend. Look forward to more videos.
You have to lower your expectations by a lot. If you think that the 7800xt will be close to the 4070ti and the 7700xt will be close to the 4070 you will be disappointed badly. 7900gre is just 8-10% faster than the 6800xt. 7800xt has worse specs than the 6800xt so I wouldn't expect anything more than 7800xt perf. = 6800xt perf and the 7700xt = 6800 perf.
I agree. However, even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation. Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen (with original launch prices) as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounts on the 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has. If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
Call this marketing bullshit that will backfire as soon as the embargo is lifted. Average scored 7900GRE is only 7% faster in absolute fps in graphic test 1 in time spy compared to 6800xt. Where that leaves 7800xt with considerably fewer cu's, time will tell.
I wanna Upgrade my graphics card pretty much rn and was thinking about an rx6950xt. Is it still a good deal for just above 600 bucks or would it be a better idea to wait for the rx7800xt
While the fiddling is going on between the two failed architectures, smart people are laying low and waiting for the 5000 series from Nvidia, and the 8000 series from AMD.
This logic is always flawed if you play games often and current GPU is slow, If GPU that's currently in system isn't slow then good, but if slow that's a whole 2 to 3 years you could've been enjoying a new card, I have a 7900xtx from rx580 and the performance leap is great enough to warrant the upgrade, there will always be better hardware on the horizon
@@Mako2401 its about the price to value ratio. Next gen should provide more uplift as this gen was more of a refresh/half step generation. Each gen all competitors need to be evaluated again, that means Nvidia, AMD and Intel. Arc seems to be coming along pretty well.
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation. Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen (with original launch prices) as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounts on the 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has. If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
It was leaked that AMD ran into an issue with N31 just before launch, which is why the launch numbers did not line up with review performance. It was also leaked that AMD was working to fix it in drivers. It remains to be seen if they are able, but perhaps the delay in the driver code was removed for certain games like farcry 6 or MW2 which could explain why the N31 cards are so performant in those games compared to the 4090. Perhaps the bug was not present on N32 from the start, or AMD has a fix they're sitting on for the N32 release to download some free performance for N31 cards.
No, Navi32 has been waiting on the clearance of excess RDNA2 stock, according to MLiD the chips were produced too early for such changes. It's the APUs coming out which have a revised design. Again from what MLiD reported the performance isn't expected to be best case, but there have been improvements in recent drivers. Benchmark results depend a lot on which games are selected. I think the pricing is based on Nvidia models, new 67 & 6800xt have been on clearance sale. AV1 encoding, improved RT and the AI engine should have some value. The CUs are not comparable across architectures, RDNA3 has multi-issue and certain games using that well while others struggle with utilisation would explain the variability of results.
@@RobBCactive As I said, N31 isn't performing to where it should, it was designed, made and tested to be faster than it is now, but due to a bug discovered just before launch they "added a small delay in the driver" to fix a visual corruption bug. Perhaps N32 does not suffer from this bug allowing it to get full designed performance. N33 isn't really RDNA3 it's more of RDNA2.5 so it's hard to compare there. And yes, features have value, there is also the significant improvement in efficiency. Even if both a 6800xt and a 7800xt display 260w the 7800xt will be using 20-30% less power due to the way RDNA2 reports power.
@@PineyJustice that was reported by MLiD in launch post-mortem inquiries. The chances of a driver fix for that issue after 8 months of it being top priority is now extremely low. Navi32 hasn't had a redesign, MLiD reported that, the performance numbers he expects from talking to engineers are not that optimistic. The comparison of 7700xt vs 4060Ti 16GB Nvidia shame GPU and the 7800xt vs 4070 tells you what AMD see as competing models. There's no point in clutching at straws, RDNA3 hasn't met the launch event expectations, RDNA4 top tier is cancelled in favour of RDNA5. The story is consistent, no amount of wishful thinking will change this generation, it's 15-20% down, which explains the initial price setting and the "kick Nvidia's ass" comment by Scot Herkelman.
@@RobBCactive It doesn't need a redesign, perhaps it wasn't an inherent architecture issue that causes it but something that is a symptom of the N31 die but not on the N32 die, like a layout issue power starving a certain component of the core. And the performance gain probably wasn't top priority, the top priority was all the things that got big complaints like VR performance, high idle power and issues with freesync. Those are all fixed so it's about the time when performance updates start rolling out. RDNA2 saw an update that was +50% opengl performance 2 years into it's lifespan.
@@PineyJusticeN31 does have some oddities with performance. It appears the VRAM is too slow for the GPU. Some games like Dead Space Remake have visual artifacts at base settings. OCing the VRAM elliminates them and also improves performance in many games. The 7900xtx is slower, on average, than the 4090, but mostly due to games with lower scene complexity. Recent games with higher geometric detail tend to favor the 7900xtx and may even run better on it than the 4090. N32 may address performance on older and less demanding games, which would improve its averages.
AMD cards always been weird, like 5-10% performance difference between them, like why would you even go for lower card? It's just there... In the end, it's great to have solid competition, we need it! It benefits everyone, just like they did with Ryzens back in the day, great performance and more cores for lower price. Now we need this in GPU market.
@@LightMCXx The GeForce GT 710 was a graphics card by NVIDIA, launched on March 27th, 2014. Built on the 28 nm process, and based on the GK208 graphics processor, the card supports DirectX 12. Even though it supports DirectX 12, the feature level is only 11_0, which can be problematic with newer DirectX 12 titles. The GK208 graphics processor is a relatively small chip with a die area of only 87 mm² and 1,020 million transistors. Unlike the fully unlocked GeForce GT 630 Rev. 2, which uses the same GPU but has all 384 shaders enabled, NVIDIA has disabled some shading units on the GeForce GT 710 to reach the product's target shader count. It features 192 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. NVIDIA has paired 2,048 MB DDR3 memory with the GeForce GT 710, which are connected using a 64-bit memory interface. The GPU is operating at a frequency of 954 MHz, memory is running at 900 MHz. Being a single-slot card, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 does not require any additional power connector, its power draw is rated at 19 W maximum. Display outputs include: 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x VGA. GeForce GT 710 is connected to the rest of the system using a PCI-Express 2.0 x8 interface. The card measures 145 mm in length, and features a single-slot cooling solution.
@Vex the 29% increase in speed from the lower compute is because they fixed a hardware error flaw inside the gpu hardware scheduler on the smaller die. This also why this card took longer to come out. The bigger cards showed artifacts when used to the full potential, these won't have that problem.
@@kevinerbs2778 Im seeing 1 month old and 8 month old video based on this so not sure which one. If ya got a direct link that be great help. Interesting if true
@@karthik7282 People who dont care about starfield can buy a 4070, 600+ gpu with 12 gbs of vram and complain in a year or two about how nvidia played them .
kinda funny how nvidia was blamed for including frame generation and now when amd announces it everbody is excited for the tech... i think we should appreciate more what nvidia brings to the tech community then blaming them... for ex. dlss 1 and dlss now... (not for their price politics)
Love the frame generation and that it's probably gonna work with my older card, but I wish they would bring it back for video! It was a cool feature when I used to have a RX580
re bottom right corner... I'm way more surprised to see Biostar there tbh. They've been out of the spotlight for over a decade now. Still alive and kicking somehow, producing some seemingly decent, Asus-ROG-looking boards (Valkyrie series for both platforms) but nobody ever talks about them... or has any in stock. Can't say I can remember the last time seeing a Biostar branded GPU either...
My guess is that the RX 7700 XT is priced as it is to allow the RX 6800 and RX 6800 XT to sell out. I expect that once the RX 6800 XT sells out, the price will drop by $50. Once the RX 6800 sells out, it'll drop another $50. AMD can't just put out a product that will prevent the sale of the products that are already out. In this way, AMD can sell out the 6000-series cards without having to take a loss on them.
I'd get a 6800 XT over the 7700 XT any day, even if the price difference is 100 bucks, but I think you may have a point. However, I think the small price difference is also because AMD is getting very high yields on the 7800 XT, and the actual manufacturing COST of the 7700 XT is actually very close to the 7800 XT. They don't care if the 7700 XT doesn't sell well, they just know that even at 450, it IS still somewhat competitive against both versions of the 4060 ti, and they know that they'll be able to lower the price to get it to sell enough units if/when they need to. They will no doubt sell FAR more 7800 XTs than 7700 XTs in the long run. The nature of their chiplet design is such that the vast majority of the main GPU chiplets won't have any defects, and apparently TSMC's defect rates have now become lower than initially estimated as well.
7900xt is around $750 new vs 7900xtx $960 new. For used cards its around 700 vs 850, so a $150 difference. If we give it the benefit of the doubt, 20% faster, it's a 21% price difference for used. 28% difference for new. At that rate you might as well just save the money for other components or for a future upgrqde and just go with the 7900xt, nearly 80-85% of the performance. Hardly an upsell compared to the 7700xt vs 7800xt.
i don't believe shit until reviews. it's the same marketing team that said 1.7X uplift for 7900xtx and we all know how that end up. would be some serious magic if 60 CU beats 72 when 80 CU GRE is slower in some games than 80 CU 6950.
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation. Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen (with original launch prices) as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounts on the 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has. If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation. Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounted 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has. If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
Nope no here. Haven’t had a game yet I can’t get 100+ fps at native max settings at 1440p on my 6800xt. Plus most games I play are mmo or FPS games which frame gen is not even wanted in those scenarios.
Definitely not excited. If my game runs at 60 with max settings I'm fine. And using it at 30 fps doesn't make sense, so I have no use case for this technology.
I'm not. I acknowledged that frame gen wasn't useless, but also didn't think it was that useful either. I'd much rather have 7% more raw performance than the option of being able to use frame-gen. You raise a good point though. A lot of people are biased and not consistent. I am never biased or inconsistent though! Okay, maybe I can be too sometimes... :P
I mean.....its a drop from the hyper inflated prices of last gen, but its also only a fairly minor upgrade, over a gen that was already fairly weak. Dont get me wrong, may still be the best value available, but its still pretty disappointing.
Inflation has been a lot higher than normal over the past three years. Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation. Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen (with original launch prices) as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounts on the 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has. If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
Think this is the best GPU launch this generation. 7800xt for $499 + Starfield is honestly the sweet spot. You get a lot of performance for that money. Plus if AntiLag+ and AMFM/FSR3 is good, AMD have a real winner on their hands. I can see a lot of folks being pretty happy with this GPU.
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT, that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has. Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's cards aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounted 6000 series. If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
Well, maybe they're planning to launch a 7750xt or a 7800 non xt at the future, but the performance of 7800xt doesn't make sense, it has basically the same performance per watts of nvidia new gen and we all saw that nvidia was better in that aspect, if those infos are true then something happened behind the scenes, maybe some kind of upgrade in the architecture??
If AMD released the mid-range 7000 series sooner then they would *have* to price the cards higher than $500. AMD had to sell the remaining 6000 series stock, which is valued between $500-$650 otherwise they'd just be competing with themselves. Now we can have 6800xt/6900% rasterisation, with better RT, more efficient for cheaper.
Apparently some of their board partners also wanted to delay the launch because a bunch of those board partners also make Nvidia graphics cards, and a lot of those Nvidia cards haven't sold as well as they'd hoped, and the retail channels were getting clogged with overpriced Nvidia cards that hardly anybody was buying. The board partners wanted to wait a bit for more stuff to sell before trying to sell and send off more videocards, regardless of what brand they were.
It's far simpler than you think. AMD had/has an overstock of 6000 series GPUs. They needed those to clear channel. Better to risk bad online comments by overpricing the 7700XT (just like 7900XT previously) than to dramatically drop prices (losing profit or taking losses) on 10's of thousands of last gen cards. Once channel clears the entry to mid level 6000 series cards, the price of the 7700XT will drop to $399 or $389 where it belongs. They chose to make a DOA launch of the 7700XT rather than lose money on 6XXX cards with a lowered price. Not sure I agree it was worth the negative RUclipsr stuff but I guess they thought it was. Same thing they did with 7900XT. They had to wait for 69XX cards to clear channel before lowering the price or people would not want those and they would have to sharply discounts 10's of thousands of units down the road. Once they were closer to sold through, we now see an average price of $769 with 7900XT where it belonged. Sadly it probably hurt them more than dropping prices on previous gen and launching 7900XT and 7700XT at thier intended pricing but only they know. It's called managing stock and protecting profit margins. Losses on existing stock is aparently worse than losing potential sales on new unshipped products.
I think the board partners who also make Nvidia cards also wanted the channels to become a bit less congested, because they had gotten clogged with overpriced Nvidia graphics cards that hardly anybody was buying, namely the 4060 ti.
7700xt will be doa but the 7800xt could be really good. Im stoked to hear about Anti Lag + as well. If they can make it as good as Reflex that'd be sweet.
7700XT price vs. 7800XT price is the same as 7900XTX vs. XT pricing. Also, there's high probability that 7800XT will be only marginally, if at all, faster than 6800XT. Worst case, just in between "ordinary" 6800 and 6800XT, considering the performance of 7900GRE.
Hi guys, planning on buying an used gpu in Brazil and i am between the 6700xt for U$370 and the 6800xt for US620, do u think the upgrade is a great ideia or should i stick with the lower end one?
I don't know how long it will take for the 7800 XT to become widely available in Brazil, but that could really help to push prices down further, especially for the 6800 XT. Both are good cards. What's your monitor like? I would invest into a good 1440p monitor, or possibly even a 4k monitor, before getting anything better than a 6700 XT. 4k 32" monitors are particularly useful for document work, and I prefer curved over flat monitors any day, especially at the 32" size. Make sure you get a monitor which is freesync compatible, and preferably with a 120 hz or higher refresh rate too. 4k monitors with good refresh rates are perfectly viable for gaming, even if you don't have enough performance to actually run games at native 4k, because 4k is where upscaling is most useful. FSR is most competitive against DLSS when running at 4k with its highest quality setting, and a 6800 XT or 7800 XT is definitely capable of actually doing that.
I wouldn't count on that. There will certainly be more models of the 7800 XT that are over the MSRP, but I'm not so sure that the 7800 XT will be that hard to find for MSRP, especially after the first month or two.
Tempted to try the 7800xt (if the reviews turn out well) but also curious to see how Intel's Battlemage GPUs turn out, whenever they get announced in the next year. Really want to upgrade from my 1080ti soon and was considering the 4070, whenever that gets to a good price but that may not happen for a while.
From what I can tell, the 7800 XT should be a bit behind a 6950 XT, maybe RTX 3090 level performance. Definitely good value if the price stays and we get a free Starfield on top.
Nah, this just screams overclocked 6800 XT performance at best. The 7900 GRE has 80 CUs and is barely 8% faster than a 6800 XT. The 7800 XT has 60 CUs, even if it does have more memory bandwidth I don't see it performing any better than the 7900 GRE, and in fact should be worse.
@@03chrisv That’s what’s strange though. When HW Unboxed tested the 7900 GRE in Last Of Us Part 1 vs the 4070 in 1440p, it was 8% faster. Here, for the 7800 XT, AMD tells us it is 9% faster. Possible explanations: “max settings” is different or AMD used a more midrange CPU with a midrange GPU, and driver overhead showed for the 4070.
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation. Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen (with original launch prices) as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounts on the 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has. If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
@mleise8292 I think AMD is being dishonest in their marketing material. They're basically saying that the 7800 XT is faster than the 7900 GRE which makes no sense. We will see when actual benchmarks come out, but my suspicion is that the 7800 XT is really supposed to be the 7800 non XT or maybe even a 7700 XT which is why the MSRP is $499 and the expected performance is underwhelming when compared to the 6800 XT.
Hmmm... does AMD Fluid Motion Frame (the frame generation) won't work for Vulkan? :/ I hope they'll add it, I mean, there're lots of games runs well if not better with Vulkan, and sometimes I do use DXVK to run some games... I wonder why it's only for DX11/12, hmm.... still interesting though, definitely going to check 7800 XT out when it's in stock here in my city.
I'm guessing the implementation of this feature is a little bit hacky - after all they basically are just injecting frames into the framebuffer. I'm guessing this requires a different workaround for Vulkan - Vulkan is typically more stringent about things like this.
Older graphic cards (1000) allegedly is bad with asynchronous computing. Frame generation from AMD is based on using this. About DX11/12 - probably easier than to do also DX10. Nvidia portal rtx works on games using DX9, so still DX11/12 sounds better for me
$269 7600 to $449 7700XT is a very big gap. Are the Navi21 supposed to go to that bracket? $400 6950XT & $300 6800, because they are not worth to be in the $499-$649 bracket. Cryptoboom prices has not landed yet.
They basically did the same as they did with the 7900 series. Making the lower tier model look pointless. The 7800XT looks like a good offering though. The 7700XT should've been like 409,99 at most.
I like how Vex is super excited to see Yeston 7800XT cards 😂
Yeston Waifu Éditions
Who wouldnt?
I mean... Me too lmao, i wish they made white version as well for 7800xt
waifus are the best 🥵
last time i made that joke about myself, somebody called me a pedo...
If they make frame gen actually works like advertised it's gonna lead to even worse optimized games than we are currently seeing
well bad devs can't wait to exploit every opportunity, can they ?
@@DragonOfTheMortalKombat I don't think blaming the devs here is correct, atleast not in every case. From what I'm seeing publishers gain the most with upscaling, framegen and so on, they can release even more unfinished games earlier.
Frame gen is idiotic. You're paying for fake frames with input latency, it's not worth it
@@De_kaid but blaming amd (essentially) is correct?
@@MrJohannson How is it fake frames ? i understand the latency part, but u actually gain a boost in ur framerates. idk why people still keep saying '' fake frames ''
Ok, let's summarize: The 7900 GRE with 80 CU is 8-10 % faster than the 4070. The 7800 XT with 60 CU is 17% faster than the 4070. Sounds like they are creating miracles at AMD.
Because these slides are marketing B$. Will be good if the 7800xt is as fast as the 6800xt because it has worse specs.
or fake numbers
7800xt=6800xt
@@tomtomkowski7653 I wouldn't say they are strictly worse. Take into account the new architecture that's more efficient and is on a smaller node. If you just look at the funky numbers, then yeah, the numbers on 7800 XT are smaller, but to say it bluntly, every single one of these numbers is more performant than these on 6800 xt. I would say it will be close in performance with a slight edge to 7800 xt.
Doesn't the 7800XT have faster GDDR6 memory and higher clocks?
imagine if the price drops from 450$ to 400$ or even 380$ for 7700xt it would be the best value in current gen gpus
This arguement makes no sense. Any GPU could be "the best value" on the market when you put an unrealistically low price tag on it.
@@mirraczeThis is exactly what happened with the 6700xt, given enaugh time the 7700xt can become the king of value, only uncertainty is how future proof 12gb can be
@@Estoc_Bestoc_ Stil more future proof tgen my poor 10gb 3080, I bough used a few month after 40 series launch with horrible timing for 650€.
@KeinNiemand I think those 10 gig are really gonna struggle in 2 years
@@mirracze $400 really isn't unrealistic in this case. The 7700XT at its current price makes no sense compared to its big brother. Like Vex said, it's almost certainly a play to get people to shell out the extra $50 for the 7800XT, then drop the 7700's price once that market is saturated. They did the same thing with the 7900XT and you saw how fast that dropped from $900 to $750, sometimes even lower on sale.
AMD doesn't want you to buy the 7700XT, but rather opt for the 7800XT for $50 more. Once stock of the 7800XT starts to drop i would thik that they will drop the price of the 7700XT
u get it
Yep, probably in most cases they would need to use 7800xt die capable in those 7700xt. Yields are just too good on this type of silicon.
Or they want you to get rid of their rdna2 N21
If AntiLag+ is even close to as good as reflex, that’ll make these RDNA3 cards even more attractive. Driver level FSR3, if good, would also be a good bonus for them.
I think the market itself will fix the RX 7700XT $450 dilemma.
watich it be 600 at retail
Yeah, 6700 XT launched at $479 MSRP, which was a poor value at the time, considering that the 3070 was just 20 bucks more, but over the time, that kinda shifted to another direction it dropped down to about $320-$350. You shouldn't really trust MSRP to the fullest, it's only what the manufacturer recommends the price should be, but the real price is getting dictated by the demand of customers.
X_irtz and even so, we haven't really seen the 3070 around 500$ until very recently.
I think the real issue is they probably don't want to sell that many 7700xt. It is probably I failed 7800xt they cut down. My guess is they don't have that many fails so they are upselling.
I feel like the 7800xt was supposed to be the 7800 and the 7900 GRE was supposed to be the 7800xt, so to me, the naming doesn't really make a lot of sense given the overall specs, but if the performance is as good as they say, then the pricing on that one is actually sort of good? It feels weird to say that about any current gen cards, but it might really be true. Of course, it's out of my budget but it's still nice to see the change.
Now, the 7700xt...that's a different story. The pricing just doesn't make any sense at all, which really sucks because if it were actually launched at $400, then I might strongly consider expanding my very limited GPU budget to get it...though even then I'd likely wait and see if it dropped to somewhere between $350-$375 range, which still leaves some room for a 7700 or a 7600xt, especially if they come to their senses and further reduce the 7600 a bit more as even though it is a better price than they first planned on, it's still a bit overpriced for what it is and how it performs..sure, compared to the NVIDIA offerings, it's not as bad, but in reality, yeah, still a bit overpriced at the $270 range currently...
Just my rambling 2 cents. It's cool if others disagree with me. I'm hoping to see some price drops from AMD at least to bring a few of their lower/mid tier cards into a better range for everyone. Let's face it, a lot of us are struggling with the price gouging on rent, groceries, utilities, etc(you can say inflation, but when entire industries are reporting record profits and record margins, it's price gouging)...so we just can't really afford overpriced GPU's so we're looking more and more at the used market or the still available new options from the AMD 6000 series.
Perhaps they will release XTX versions that are XT. It indicates AMD is targeting efficiency . If they market this way it's saying: we want the performance chip to be a bit faster but have the memory performance you'll need for like 4 years.
For $500 is it great? Who knows. It'll use less power which means less issues keeping things cooled down. It may be a warranty cost savings. There's a lot of points to AMD's internal reasoning that we have to extrapolate here imho but if you want my take:
The 4060Ti 16gb and 7800XT will age alright. We probably will see a wall with graphics for a while anyway and in 4 years these will just seem expensive and a bit slow compared to whatever the better rast. GPUs do in the future. The R9 290 had 4gb of GDDR5 in 2013 and it gamed fine for 5 years even playing RDR2 in low settings.
I have a feeling they will stick on the 16gb cards for a while. Lateral upgrades with better rast and more software features. Both Nvidia and AMD. But once Nvidia makes a big mistake it will likely be taken over by AMD hailmary like Ryzen. I think AMD is taking over in gaming in a slow but steady way.
Who knows what their holdbacks to higher memory cards are but my guess is the price of 2gb chips and the lack of desire to design huge boards with cheaper options. The Ps5 and console lifecycle is watched closely and the notebook segment is always a concern. Getting 12gb will probably be standard in many of the expensive notebooks on the VRAM side. Interesting times in the GPU world but I think Amd made a smart move. They can make the XT card their midrange offering while making the not XT obviously a lesser GPU. Then the XTX can be traditional AMD. Card reliability will be better this way and I think it will build reputation. These 7800XT are less likely to have issues than if they were massively more powerful and sipping electrons like crazy. They just look like the start of a new generation in graphics cards. We are maybe a few years from a new "Pascal" type card if it will ever exist again. Nvidia lost a lot of money because of the 10 series but also built a reputation around it for years, mostly on the backs of AIBs they snubbed by bringing in their own manufacturing processes from enterprise cards to the Founders cards. It was non-competitive.
Furthermore, this input lag trend is going to end. It's just a better illusion than that old gimmick 3D Vision from Nvidia or whatever that was. And how G Sync was the big scare for about 2 years because the Hulk marketing machine is good. I doubt AMD cares about FSR as a technology and that is actually what I want to see. If DLSS dies out and AMD makes FSR the "my GPU is a bit old and need help" feature it was supposed to be originally. People forgot this. Anyway if they're rid of this obligation to match Nvidia it will ground studios that publish dishonest products. Sometimes not the devs fault, sometimes the whole thing is a bit moldy.
I look at the bright side here. AMD is tidying up and marketing pretty well in the long run. When the 8800xt and 9800xt are a thing, everyone will think back to the 8800GTX from Nvidia that used to run Crysis in 720p at like... whatever FPS paired with a Core Duo. But it won't be a card prone to problems and it may signal the lack of FSR development = huge growth in AMD driver development speed. If they start matching Nvidia without all the need for accounts, email logins for GeForce profiles.
Anyway DLSS and it's forced rival FSR are not good for gaming . Let's hope Starfield is at least as good as Fallout 4 and feels like it's from 2018. It probably will, just like Fallout 4 felt mostly outdone visually by games like Crysis 2 and BF3 which were earlier titles. I'd expect that from Bethesda but like RDR2 and Skyrim, it ends up being fine because however they program the games they handle mods well despite engine limitations. In the future Starfield will look still like a modern game if you have 2026 hardware for example. Let's hope this card sell well and AMD has some widespread success. It would be a relief
7800 xt for 500 bucks, plus Starfield seems like a really good deal. 16 gbs, pretty good performance, plus HyperX in the future.
same price, same performance, same power usage as $520 6800xt - it doesn't sound good at all.
Not to mention that the 7800xt has worse specs (fewer CUs, less L3 Cache) than the 6800xt.
To make it a really good deal this card should be named 7800 and should cost $450.
@@tomtomkowski7653how can you say same performance when the 7800xt is allegedly 17% faster than the 4070* which is slightly faster than the 6800? You're getting a new card, which performs better at a lower price.
@@tomtomkowski7653 Except they won't use the same power. If a 6800xt says it's using 280w it's actually using 360w, ALL RDNA2 cards only monitor core power, they do not take into account the power draw of the vram or losses in conversion from 12 to 1.2v, these losses can be somewhat significant, at full draw anywhere between 30w and 80w just for conversion loss, that's why the mosfets have heatsinks. RDNA 3 reports total card power.
@@nathanquintalsince when 3070 is faster than 6800? Even 3070ti can't keep up with 6800.
The 7800xt (19.4 Gbps) will have faster gddr6 memory than the 6800xt (16Gbps)
The most interesting thing is that because the 7000 series has DisplayPort 2.1 universally (AIB allowing), when Fluid Motion Frames is released you'll see more of those frames (generated or not) at higher resolutions, at least with compatible monitors. Its a very small benefit, (im not lying about the impact) but it atleast seems like AMD had plans to be able to do as such with AFMF.
Display port is so much better.
I can already get 240 fps at 1440p with displayport 1.4. That is definitely already enough for me, but I guess this could actually matter with a 4k 240 hz monitor.
Never! Never doubted AMD keeping up on the market as a solid choice option. Waiting for you, Battlemage!
Battlemage.................Polly wants a cookiee.
Battlemage.................Polly wants a cookiee.
Battlemage.................Polly wants a cookiee.
The 7800XT with Starfield (Premium Edition) is an awesome win for consumers now ….. and with FSR3 (and all its associated features) coming in the near future AMD may offer the mid range customer sone vg value and performance 😱🤯🥳🥳🥳
I choosed rdna2 over Ampere, but back in the day companies were making real generational improvements.
Now it's just cut down products replacements. Maybe with rdna5 or rtx6000 something change and i will upgrade again.
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT, that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has.
If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
@@syncmonism yes that's exactly what i also think about this, right now my _XFX Merc Black rx6750xt_ it's performing 1-2avg fps less than rx6800 in any 1080p game and on pair with an rtx3070ti (when it's not slowed down by the 8GB of vRAM) in 1440p.
I won't use RT even if i had any of these GPUs i'm matching. The rx7700xt it's performing exactly like my card (1-2% better in the best case scenario), according to AMD recent bench graphs released.
The only things i did to my Radeon are: small undervolt, 2,8GHz overclock, maxed out vRAM sliders and Power Limit. For the 1st time in 20 years i bought a really good silicon so i'm aware that it's super rare to have my performance gains on other rx6750xt GPUs...
But still rtx40 (below 4080) and rx7000 (below 7900xtx) are just replacements built to matching the performance tiers of previous gens at the price they sell today.
edit: I really hope rdna5/rtx6000 will bring some real generational improvements, or intel ARC 3rd gen smashing the price/performance without the problems of ARC 1st gen.
All these announcements from Nvidia and AMD make me want to wait for actual testing before buying a new graphics card.
For now I am sticking to my RTX 3060 that I have had since Dec. 2021. With luck I'll be able to use FSR3 with the RTX 3060 just by installing Adrenaline 🤪
You can't install Adrenaline on an Nvidia GPU, pretty sure it will refuse to start. FSR3 will likely be toggleable in game settings.
Adrenaline isn't msi afterburner. 🤣
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT, that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has.
If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
There wasn't enough time to modify RDNA3, even a slight change to a wiring layer takes at least six months to verify and fab and the chips were probably made last year. The difference is in the size of the caches, L0 and L1 are double the size per WGP in the 7900 series. This will make a bigger impact on performance at resolutions higher than 1440p
Amazing channel,also what phone do you have?
The 7700 and 7900 are made of defective parts, that means a limited supply, there is no point selling them cheap if you dont have many to sell.
Love my 6700 XT. 350 bucks. Free 100 game. 12GB of vram, 2400 mhz base clock, has a lil ray tracing if you wanna dabble in it. If you wanted the same thing from nividia youd have to spend at least 500 - 600 just to get the same. With nivida, its either lots or vram, slow clock speed/bus OR lots of Clock speed on a 256 bit bus, but with only 8gb of vram, if you want both, you must pay and arm and a leg, 3 house mortgages, and swimming pool, a red Mercedes convertible, and the neighbors dog...
According to some rumors it was supposed to be the 7800 without xt and the 7900 GRE was supposed to be the xt but the yields of 7900 xt were better than expected or sth like that.
No one said that. They'd sell a 500$ 7800 non xt as xt though.
According to sources, the silicon yield on 7000 series was better than expected. This means there's more chips that meet the standards for XT cards, and less to bin down for the non-XT. Because of this, they're giving less of a price break on the non-xt to push more demand up to the surplus of XT cards.
it's still hard to swallow 500$ for a midrange GPU, but I guess times have changed since I got my HD7970 for 500€ at release...
Just for the inflation, raw materials and energy costs, you need to add some 10-20% on the price.
@@mirracze which would me 50-100€ but new high end GPUs are at 1k...
@@mirracze My last NVidia card was a 980, I got that used but even at MSRP it was $550. Inflation hasn't been great but double is a bit extreme.
Of course we don't really even need to do that math, since NVidia has been kind enough to tell us outright that they're setting record profits despite sales numbers plummeting.
Its funny as here in europe i got rx 6750 xt for 500 Dollars
yeah but you probably had half the wage income than today when the 7970 was realeased. Also the 7970 is basically the same performance as the 5700g apu that only uses 65watts...So times change....
i feel like 7700xt's price has a main purpose of getting those people who were waiting on it to go "meh" and buy some of the overstocked lower 6000 series cards instead. then it will gradually lower over time. any upselling to the 7800xt is just a side effect of their real goal: getting rid of these old cards. obviously it's a pretty big issue, given they waited so long to launch these.
Is the Rx 6800xt mid or high range gaming card?
high end card
It's marketed as a QHD card. Which is a mid-resolution between FHD and 4K.
If 1440p maxed settings 60fps on any game is not High end for you, it’s not one.
high mid range
Mid range. It uses a mid-sized GPU. The GPU is named "Navi 32" and that is in-line with the 6700 XT's GPU naming of "Navi 22" from the previous generation.
If you adjust for inflation, 500 USD today is equivalent to about 425 in 2020, when the 6800 XT first launched, and that's around 33% less than what the 6800 XT's launch MSRP pricing was. As such, the 7800 XT offers about a 50% performance per dollar improvement over the 6800 XT.
The launch price of the 6700 XT was bloated, at 480 USD about two and a half years ago in early 2021. However, AMD was probably planning to launch it at around 400 to 430, until the GPU shortage messed everything up. Even if the 6700 XT had launched at the much lower price of 400 USD back in early 2021, the 7800 XT at 500 USD in 2023 would still be offering AT LEAST a 33% improvement in value per dollar now in 2023, if you properly account for inflation, and the fact that the 7800 XT has more Vram and some other improvements and features which come with the newer architecture adds additional value to the roughly 40% improvement in performance that the 7800 XT likely has over the 6700 XT. I'm assuming that the 7800 XT will have roughly the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT, maybe slightly worse.
Wouldn't be the first time they lie about performance chart. The one thing I can say whenever Amd do something good or bad nearly everybody try to spin it to look good or be optimistic. When nvidia do something good or bad nearly everybody try to spin it bad or be pessimistic. Most of the reviewers straight up ignore nvidia cards feature superiority. Ignoring frametime data with reflex vs antilag etc etc. I think they created a fan boy masses who easily fooled and never tried what nvidia has to offer in first hand experience only with youtube compression. Price/performance is not equal to price/value. Value cannot be measured while throwing out half of the product features set. The comparison is dead simple since Amd does not innovate and most of the time copy with subpar results. Its fine if you(generally speaking) do not want to pay for a better product but at least do not be ignorant or delusion about it.
First
While I'm not the target market for the 7700 and 7800 as I already splurged and picked up the 7900 xt when it was on sale, I'm happy they're seemingly making an attempt at the lower end. *Hopefully* these slides are actually accurate this time though... Maybe they learned their lesson... We'll know soon. Not to mention the whole FSR3 stuff.
Let them cook.
You say "let them cook" but having bought their current gen card makes your statement irrelevant.
The only thing that matters in the end is your purchasing decisions.
Everything else just boils down to that. It's a simple binary.
From company's POV -
Buy: Good.
Don't buy: Bad.
That's it.
If you buy and then complain, who gives a damn?
Just keep buying and complaining, nobody cares.
The only way you could ever exert real pressure if you are not satisfied with the market is by not buying.
If you buy, you're saying "I'm okay with this". Otherwise you wouldn't have bought.
PS: if you feel that I misunderstood what you meant by "let them cook" then please explain it to me in more detail.
@@Humanaut. It's not that deep really. Was just hoping for the best for people who haven't bought and are looking too in this specific price segment. I want more people to be able to actually get in and pc game.
Also, "let them cook" is just another way to say "let's see what they do". Which I think is a valid sentiment given how AMD enjoys fumbling the ball from time to time.
@@shortstaccck7965 well it is "that deep" if you're thinking about which market forces bring forth what outcomes.
The outcomes that a consumer would want (reasonable price/performance) is not the same outcome a company that nearly has a monopoly would want (maximum profits).
There is a power struggle, a constant tug of war going on between the duopoly and the consumer.
If there was decent competition this wouldn't be the case - but there isn't.
(Let's see what Intel/arc does next gen)
The only reason consumers will ever get decent priced/performance in this mono/duopoly is if consumers refuse to buy until companies give in.
There is no other alternative.
@@Humanaut. bro you took this way out of proportion and you can buy something off the promise of better performance thus not making it irrelevant if youve already purchased because you might still be waiting for the feature set and software sweet to complete its course when you buy into this generation of rdna 3 youd be buying into the idea of fsr3 hyper rx and fsr4 in the long run which is where the let them cook comes into play as they are literally whipping these software enhancements up in their lab now with that said trying to make it into one of those if you support you buy if you dont you dont buy arguments is entirely stupid because ppl buy what they can afford and what they think will work out better for them in the long run most ppl dont give af about being shills for one company over another but if the product has the features they want theyll buy it plain and simple period also buying something and complaining about its short comings is also how refinement and progress is achieved do you think ppl have no complaints about the rtx 4090 because they do and all those complaints will be sent towards the 5090 or whatever flagship they make next and they will be refined out so all in all your take is just a very simple minded limited view of what makes people actually buy pc components
@@syreemills1553 Nothing you said takes anything away from the points I made.
The first point you made is summarized by the concept of future proofing.
That is a debate in and of itself.
Some elements of future proofing are valid (like more VRAM = more future proof), other elements are very questionable, like that future patches will deliver x% performance improvement or how you just don't know how good/bad fsr 3.0 will be or wether hyperrx will ever come out at all. But this is completely beside the point and a different topic.
Yes people use many different metrics to come to a conclusion on wether or not a product is worth purchasing.
That is self evident and never disputed.
You are not the original author of the "let them cook" phrase (do you know how it is most commonly used?) - you just gave me your interpretation of it but not what it actually means.
You can not separate price and quality of the product.
If you buy a product for 100$ and then afterwards say it has flaws x y and z then the RnD department might or might not listen to your feedback for future iterations for improvement - you still said "this is worth 100$ the way it is right now", otherwise you wouldn't have bought it.
Of course, just because it's worth "100$ right now" based on the fact that you paid that much doesn't mean that it will still be worth 100$ in 2 years if they don't improve or iterate.
That's also self evident and not disputed.
So, to get to the actual issue - people don't complain about Nvidia cards being bad per se, but they complain about THE PRICE being bad, because Nvidia literally named the 4050 a 4060 (this is proven by the hardware they used) and then charged 4070 prices for it.
You can not talk about a card without talking about the price.
For 200€ the 4060 would be a great card. For 300/400/500 it's not.
So, you can either buy the card and complain about THE PRICE in which case your word had 0 value because you bought the card.
Or you can not buy the card, reject the reconditioning of the market and then there is nothing more you need to do except watch the prices fall.
Of course this only works on a collective level but a collective is nothing more than many individuals combined.
I like his bed in the background. He is like a friend from the neighbourhood.
Well I was about to buy a 4070 but now I'm waiting for release and the testing but rn that 7800xt looks yummy. All I need to finish the new pc
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation.
Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounted 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has.
If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
Doesn't make sense, this is 30% less specs than a 7900xt, which is 30% better than a 6800xt, meaning they are equal (and they cost the same), so no upgrade after 3 years
7800 XT is Navi 32 XT, a successor to Navi 22 XT (6700 XT). That's why it's not that big of a leap over the 6800 XT and also why it has a much lower msrp
But on the other hand 7700XT has more cores than the 6700XT.
This is why AMD should've called the 7800 XT a 7700 XT.
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation.
Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounted 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has.
If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
The 7800 XT isnt actually gonna be 17 percent faster, its just marketing bs. Its likely to actually be only 5-10 percent faster than the 6800XT at best, but realistically even if it were 17 percent faster, the reason why it would be tech for tech performing better than the 7900’s, is because its probably not using chiplet design. Their MCM design is broken, and reason ive been saying nobody should be buying the 7900’s cause they run like garbage and super buggy c and just in general the architecture is awful and negates any advantages RDNA3 has over RDNA2 by moving to 5nm because of the introduction of so much lag.if i remember right, it was only the 7900’s that would have that and the 7600 XT itself also doesnt use MCM. Its also why the 7600 XT uses its own different drivers vs the 7900’s and why they take different times to release. This would also mean a big reason for the delay is cause they didnt know how to fit the 7800 XT into their price and performance stack, and needed to make sure it didnt make the 7900 XT useless. Im pretty sure if they did a “refresh” of both cards they would abandon the MCM and use monolithic and put out a card that wasnt as fast as A 4090 and ran hotter, but still got pretty close-ish and could charge a lot less for it. The 7800 XT seems like it could be a good alternative for the 4070, but its pretty damn late and the 6800 XT was already a good alternative if you didnt care about RT, worse efficiency, worse upscaling, worse encoding and streaming options. For those whole only cared about raster performance, i dont think anything changes here, especial if the 7800 XT drops the 6800 XTs price closer to $450
I'm keeping the 6900xt. For a long time.
yeah good choice, enjoy goated performance on it
like why would you even think about upgrading ? it's a beast.
And someone told you to sell it or replace it? Who are you talking to buddy
Same bro :D got it for almost a year now and FPS is going up with every driver patch in all games :D
I recommend two of my friends to buy one . And if qny more of my friends want to buy a gpu in our region I still recommend 6900xt and 6800xt . Used , 6900xt are going for 300-350$ in here
I really hope this becomes popular, cause then it might incentivize their software development teams to give us drivers that don't crash certain games lol
7800XT to be 17% faster than the 6800XT for 500 dollars? That would be massive value, but press X for DOUBT. 😂
I don't think it will be 17% maybe 3 to 10% and have significant increase in RT performance compared to the 6800xt which is an ok thing I guess
@@mohdrai-og4kh Yep, for the price is still ok, but it won't be ok to lose from the 6800XT in different situations.
I don't think it will be 17% faster either. But, even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation.
Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen (with original launch prices) as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounts on the 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has.
If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
Honestly, I feel like AMD was going to announce 550$ and 450$, but they saw all the people online saying if they priced the 60CU card over 500$ that nobody would buy it.
they've been taking so long with the 7800 and 7700 for two reasons
1. clearing out 6000 stock ,
and 2. they knew when they released this with it's performance in spitting distance of the 7900 xt , they are gonna have to drop price on the 7900xt to make it's price make sense. and in turn also drop the 7900xtx's price as well.
Yea makes sense
Apparently it was also because the board partners (many of whom also make and sell Nvidia and/or Intel cards), were not selling as many cards as they wanted, and the supply chains and retail channels were getting clogged with overpriced Nvidia cards which weren't selling, and so some of the board partners told AMD that they weren't ready to send out more new AMD graphics cards yet.
@@syncmonism that makes sense.
The 7700XT is simply there to look as being better value than nVidia. Think about it. It's exactly in the middle of the $400 and $500 price of the 4060Ti 8GB and 16GB cards respectively, while being faster. And then, for $50 more, you get significantly more performance.
I don't think it's really an upsell tactic, but rather that yields are good enough that they prefer to push people to the 7800XT to avoid getting shortages of the 7700XT.
7800 XT is what a 7800 should have been (if there was one) 60 compute units. 7800 XT is just another refresh so it's basically a 6800 XT option for when the stock dries up. RDNA3 is a refresh gen. I see no point buying 7800 XT over used 6800 XT unless you really want a new card or are super skeptical about buying used.
You get driver support for 2 more years, you get guarantee, the 7800 xt has ai cores so can use the full hyoerx while 6800 xt for example wont have anti lag +, the gpu spends less power than 6800 xt, and also , is on rdna 3 which might improve in the future with new drivers. Yeah, same as 6800 xt.
I think it’s probably some logistical thing where they couldn’t stagger out the releases or hold off on the 7700XT. They’re basically sacrificing its launch reviews to give a clear signal to consumers they should buy off the rest of RDNA 2 stock if their budget is $400 or below. Once it’s gone I think it’ll go to $379-429 depending on the AIB.
dont worry..I'm just gonna wait for the review from LTT..haha
I think Amd needs to Re-adjust Msrps of their Cards. Rx 7600 for $230-250, 7700xt for $380-400, 7800xt at $500, 7900GRe for $600, 7900Xt for $750, 7900xtx for $900.
$500 for 7800xt is freaking great
:D
@@halrichard1969 :D
@@halrichard1969 Seriously though, even if it's only the same standard raster performance of the 6800 XT, which I think it will be, that actually is still a big improvement in value over the LAUNCH MSRP pricing of the various 6000 series cards, especially if you account for inflation, which has been a LOT higher than normal over the past three years.
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation.
Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen (with original launch prices) as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounts on the 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has.
If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
Prices won't fall till all 6 series cards are gone.thats why prices are higher on 7900 and 7700. The parts that make the least sense when 6 series can slot in to fill the gap.
Just bought a 4070. Now I'm having buyer's remorse.
Nah, Dlss is still better. I also don't think those benchmarks are real to a degree. It will be more competitive than you think.
Yes, 7800XT will obliterate that 4070 easy with FSr3
Funny i did have DP 2.1 problems with my TV on RX 6800XT. Switchin to RTX 3070 and his HDMI 2.1 problems gonn. hmmm ??@@killakame-3434
I don't think any 40 series card is worth it same goes for amd 7900xt and 7900xtx I think you should have gotten something used from the 30 series or 6000 series
@@killakame-3434 lmaoo "with fsr3" and yet people upvoted your comments its hilarous to me how many rampant amd fanboys are in youtube section, people have also said "4070 ti destroys 3090 using dlss3" but gets downvoted heavily, now just because amd did it its suddenly "look fine"
After the hype dies down for the 7800xt they’re going to drop prices for the 7700xt to 399 for sure. They want to upsell people on the better value and once those costumers are happy they’ll cater to the budget buyers and adjust the 7700xt’s price
i love 7800 xt.. i love the beautiful gift that AMD has given to all gamers with older graphics cards.. and I am determined that when I decide to do another build to replace the current one.. it will be totally AMD hardware
I did this back in December with an AM5 build. First one ever. 7900XT and a 7700x cpu with 32gigs of system ram. The world is right again and getting better. AMD Adrenaline software is a Dream to work with. Throw in a moderate OC to both the CPU and the GPU with undervolting and you get better performance with better temps and less power used. Whats not to like?
It's definitely not a gift, but it DOES look likely to be the best value card of this generation.
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation.
Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounted 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has.
If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
Fluid motion was really great with Movies and anime. Now they made it for almost modern video game titles? That's kind amazing.
maybe I will sound a bit paradoxically, but you know who to blame for 7700XT and 7900XT pricing ? TSMC :)
Their 5nm nodes are just too good, so almost everything they produce are full fleged chips. So AMD wanna sell them.
Thats why it looked like AMD was telling you - dont mind 7900XT, just get the XTX and now the same with 7800 XT.
I am not PC component engineer or something, but the math is pretty simple - you pay the same price in case of both of themn, minus: 4GB VRAM ( 37/4=about 9$ ? - there were rummors, that 16GB VRAM cost 37$, thats why the 37/4 math ), 1 less 6nm controler for the VRAM ( I really dont know how much that cost, 5$ ? ), few less capacitors and stuff in terms of powersuply ( 1-2 $ ? ), thinner radiator ? ( some cents ? )....... and you end up at what, 20 $ cheaper card ? and now you wanna position it competetively and not losing much ? Yeah... Not to mention that they probably really dont have many "deffective" N32s, so they would have to cut down some of the good ones to make enough these GPUs ( 7700XT ) it ppl wanna buy them.
So, they did what was expected - they dont wanna you to buy it - buy 7800XT instead, izi.
still, I am glad that atleast the 7800XT is priced very competitive.
Which is why they will lower 7700xt price in few weeks/months. When 7800xt will sit on shelfs for too long, AMD will be "forced" to "start" selling 7700xt
@@ladrok97 Ehmm... are you ok ? If the reviews will be atleast neutral for the 7800XT, they will not sit on the shelfs.
If you red me properly, you should understand that AMD wanna you to buy 7800 and so they didnt produced too many 7700, cause its not too beneficial for them. So they will not need to reduce the price eitherway. Either is your logic strange, or you are some Jensen fan.
@@AdalbertSchneider_ Not everyone can spend 500$ on GPU. In Europe you need to add VAT (20% on average) and exchange rate. When a lot of 7800xt will sit on shelf, then AMD will be forced into reducing prices of 7700xt, because 400$ for GPU sounds less scary than 500$
Eventually it's more beneficial to sell products with worse margins than to sell nothing at all
@@ladrok97 bro, can you open your eyes agin ? the EU prices are 489 & 549 €. Thats how we in EU live - with VAT. So if you cannt aford 489,- € GPU, AMD has solution for you - 6700 XT, 6750 XT or an advice - save up a bit and buy later. Dont take me wrong, beofre I havent seen the performance slides, I also expected the 7700 to be at 400$.( so what, 440 € ? ). Yes, AMD is missing something to destroy 4060Ti, and they could have it. But sadly, they have not enough "that bad N32s" to make more of the 7700XT, let even what I would expect - 48CU 7700 nonXT for even cheaper. ( XT for 400 and non for 350+- would be a dream situation )
JUST A MOMENT...RX 7900 XT has 40% more cores (running at 10% lower frequency) than RX 7800 XT and is only 10% faster!? And the RX 7800 XT has 11% more cores and will be 33% faster than the RX 7700 XT (whose cores have a 5% higher operating frequency)... What!? There is something very strange to me...
Seems like the engineers had fixed rdna 3 and the architecture has reach it efficiency requirements?
Waiting for 7950xtx?
That's at 1440p. The Navi 31 GPUs have double the L0 and L1 cache per WGP compared to Navi 32 so the difference will be bigger at 4K. The 7800 XT also has a 33% wider memory bus compared to 7700 XT and an additional cache die which also contribute to the difference
@@shanent5793 I hope so, but I'm afraid that simple math (for once) can't be fooled so easily. We'll see, I hope they weren't lying.
As much as AMD fumbled the bag on the RX 7700 XT, it was a good showing from them. The RX 7800 XT looks to be awesome value (gotta wait for reviews obvs) and FSR3 and driver level framegen via asynchronis compute is a damn cool feature. Competition is good! Now, let's see how Nvidia respond...
nvidia will not respond since they got everyone who use gpu for anything else besides gaming buying their gpu. They don't care about gamers who use their computer gpu only for gaming. They care about ia farmer and content creator, well if the price was lower but you get the idea.
@@aldofer8832 While I'm inclined to agree with you, MLiD recently put out a video where he claimed a source from Nvidia told him they're lowering the cost for AIB's on the 4060ti 16gb. The fact it's the 4060ti 16gb explicitly and not the 4070 and 4070ti is damn weird, that card is made for professionals on a budget (and is WAY overpriced). Of course, leaks, MLiD, take with a dump truck of salt. The reality is Nvidia are going to have to respond or suffer the consequences. We'll see what happens :)
@@aldofer8832 yep can confirm sometimes i wonder why some people pay top dollar gpu only for it to be "good" at gaming only while being shit at everything else and has horrible software support (totally not my critisim to amd)
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation.
Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounted 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has.
If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
@@anarchicnerd666 I mean I would agree but the reason why it's getting a price drop is mainly because professional even on a budget tend to prefer at least the 4070 and the 4060ti got bad review from content creator focus test and professional alike.
Nice Video, Good Topic. My take on this is that the 7900 series cards came at a much less stable time both for availability and pricing. I would have purchased a 7900xtx if I could have gotten one but had to settle for a $899 xt back in December. My whole PC would no longer function with stability for gaming. Barely for web surfing. Luckily coming from a $600 1080gtx I was astounded at my whole new AMD5 build performance. I still am. First all AMD build ever and its great.
Now, the 7800xt is a different animal in a different time. Card availability is no longer an issue. Pricing is competitive, because it needs to be. Yes, AMD has had more time to make a more efficient card either thru drivers or hardware efficiency. More likely, both are factors. Slowly but surely AMD is learning how to not shoot themselves in the foot.
Keep up the good work on your channel my young friend. Look forward to more videos.
You have to lower your expectations by a lot.
If you think that the 7800xt will be close to the 4070ti and the 7700xt will be close to the 4070 you will be disappointed badly.
7900gre is just 8-10% faster than the 6800xt. 7800xt has worse specs than the 6800xt so I wouldn't expect anything more than 7800xt perf. = 6800xt perf and the 7700xt = 6800 perf.
I guess we'll just have to wait until the benchmarks release, I mean I would atleast expect a 10-20% performance increase over last gen.
I agree. However, even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation.
Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen (with original launch prices) as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounts on the 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has.
If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
Call this marketing bullshit that will backfire as soon as the embargo is lifted. Average scored 7900GRE is only 7% faster in absolute fps in graphic test 1 in time spy compared to 6800xt. Where that leaves 7800xt with considerably fewer cu's, time will tell.
7700xt should've been priced at 400$> to begin with just like how 7900XT should've been a below 800$ GPU. Radeon never learns...........
They’re not stupid. Doing it once it might be a mistake, but twice now. It clearly is a pricing strategy.
I'm desperate for them to release a 2 slot design of the 7800XT
For what case? I know a few people who have cases which can't handle any more than a two slot card. It's a common issue.
rx 7700xt is way overpriced too. it should be no more $400.
true.
I wanna Upgrade my graphics card pretty much rn and was thinking about an rx6950xt. Is it still a good deal for just above 600 bucks or would it be a better idea to wait for the rx7800xt
While the fiddling is going on between the two failed architectures, smart people are laying low and waiting for the 5000 series from Nvidia, and the 8000 series from AMD.
This logic is always flawed if you play games often and current GPU is slow, If GPU that's currently in system isn't slow then good, but if slow that's a whole 2 to 3 years you could've been enjoying a new card, I have a 7900xtx from rx580 and the performance leap is great enough to warrant the upgrade, there will always be better hardware on the horizon
@@DonaldHendleyBklynvexRecordsI think the question is more about what your disposable income is.
Just to be clear. "smart" people are waiting for gpu series that will come out in 2025?
@@Humanaut. And the 5000 series will be cheaper right?
@@Mako2401 its about the price to value ratio.
Next gen should provide more uplift as this gen was more of a refresh/half step generation.
Each gen all competitors need to be evaluated again, that means Nvidia, AMD and Intel. Arc seems to be coming along pretty well.
that transition to the sponsor was as rough as my relationship with my father.
:O
It probably will be about on par with a 6800xt.
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation.
Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen (with original launch prices) as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounts on the 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has.
If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
It was leaked that AMD ran into an issue with N31 just before launch, which is why the launch numbers did not line up with review performance. It was also leaked that AMD was working to fix it in drivers. It remains to be seen if they are able, but perhaps the delay in the driver code was removed for certain games like farcry 6 or MW2 which could explain why the N31 cards are so performant in those games compared to the 4090. Perhaps the bug was not present on N32 from the start, or AMD has a fix they're sitting on for the N32 release to download some free performance for N31 cards.
No, Navi32 has been waiting on the clearance of excess RDNA2 stock, according to MLiD the chips were produced too early for such changes.
It's the APUs coming out which have a revised design.
Again from what MLiD reported the performance isn't expected to be best case, but there have been improvements in recent drivers.
Benchmark results depend a lot on which games are selected.
I think the pricing is based on Nvidia models, new 67 & 6800xt have been on clearance sale. AV1 encoding, improved RT and the AI engine should have some value.
The CUs are not comparable across architectures, RDNA3 has multi-issue and certain games using that well while others struggle with utilisation would explain the variability of results.
@@RobBCactive As I said, N31 isn't performing to where it should, it was designed, made and tested to be faster than it is now, but due to a bug discovered just before launch they "added a small delay in the driver" to fix a visual corruption bug. Perhaps N32 does not suffer from this bug allowing it to get full designed performance. N33 isn't really RDNA3 it's more of RDNA2.5 so it's hard to compare there. And yes, features have value, there is also the significant improvement in efficiency. Even if both a 6800xt and a 7800xt display 260w the 7800xt will be using 20-30% less power due to the way RDNA2 reports power.
@@PineyJustice that was reported by MLiD in launch post-mortem inquiries.
The chances of a driver fix for that issue after 8 months of it being top priority is now extremely low.
Navi32 hasn't had a redesign, MLiD reported that, the performance numbers he expects from talking to engineers are not that optimistic.
The comparison of 7700xt vs 4060Ti 16GB Nvidia shame GPU and the 7800xt vs 4070 tells you what AMD see as competing models.
There's no point in clutching at straws, RDNA3 hasn't met the launch event expectations, RDNA4 top tier is cancelled in favour of RDNA5.
The story is consistent, no amount of wishful thinking will change this generation, it's 15-20% down, which explains the initial price setting and the "kick Nvidia's ass" comment by Scot Herkelman.
@@RobBCactive It doesn't need a redesign, perhaps it wasn't an inherent architecture issue that causes it but something that is a symptom of the N31 die but not on the N32 die, like a layout issue power starving a certain component of the core. And the performance gain probably wasn't top priority, the top priority was all the things that got big complaints like VR performance, high idle power and issues with freesync. Those are all fixed so it's about the time when performance updates start rolling out. RDNA2 saw an update that was +50% opengl performance 2 years into it's lifespan.
@@PineyJusticeN31 does have some oddities with performance. It appears the VRAM is too slow for the GPU. Some games like Dead Space Remake have visual artifacts at base settings. OCing the VRAM elliminates them and also improves performance in many games. The 7900xtx is slower, on average, than the 4090, but mostly due to games with lower scene complexity. Recent games with higher geometric detail tend to favor the 7900xtx and may even run better on it than the 4090. N32 may address performance on older and less demanding games, which would improve its averages.
AMD cards always been weird, like 5-10% performance difference between them, like why would you even go for lower card? It's just there... In the end, it's great to have solid competition, we need it! It benefits everyone, just like they did with Ryzens back in the day, great performance and more cores for lower price. Now we need this in GPU market.
7800xt gonna be the new 580
more like GT 710 to me
@@LightMCXx delusions
trueeeeeeeee
Seriosly? With TDP 265w, i don't need this crap for free.
@@LightMCXx The GeForce GT 710 was a graphics card by NVIDIA, launched on March 27th, 2014. Built on the 28 nm process, and based on the GK208 graphics processor, the card supports DirectX 12. Even though it supports DirectX 12, the feature level is only 11_0, which can be problematic with newer DirectX 12 titles. The GK208 graphics processor is a relatively small chip with a die area of only 87 mm² and 1,020 million transistors. Unlike the fully unlocked GeForce GT 630 Rev. 2, which uses the same GPU but has all 384 shaders enabled, NVIDIA has disabled some shading units on the GeForce GT 710 to reach the product's target shader count. It features 192 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. NVIDIA has paired 2,048 MB DDR3 memory with the GeForce GT 710, which are connected using a 64-bit memory interface. The GPU is operating at a frequency of 954 MHz, memory is running at 900 MHz.
Being a single-slot card, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 does not require any additional power connector, its power draw is rated at 19 W maximum. Display outputs include: 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x VGA. GeForce GT 710 is connected to the rest of the system using a PCI-Express 2.0 x8 interface. The card measures 145 mm in length, and features a single-slot cooling solution.
@Vex the 29% increase in speed from the lower compute is because they fixed a hardware error flaw inside the gpu hardware scheduler on the smaller die. This also why this card took longer to come out. The bigger cards showed artifacts when used to the full potential, these won't have that problem.
First time hearing about it. Any source?
@@Andytlp Check out "Moore's law is dead" he talks about the artificing problems the RX 7900 XT/X had during bring up.
@@kevinerbs2778 Im seeing 1 month old and 8 month old video based on this so not sure which one. If ya got a direct link that be great help. Interesting if true
@@Andytlp I've heard about it, but I'm not sure if this is the case
The 7700 XT should've been no more than $350 in my opinion.
your opinion is wrong in my opinion
@@AbbasDalal1000 I respect your opinion, but I think you're wrong and mine is right in my opinion.
It should not exist as it is this 7700xt is the real 7600 at 260~300$
And 7800xt at 450$
@@zdenkakoren6660 I don't think so
I think the 7800xt should cost 10$ and the 7700xt should be free😊
Kinda hype about the 7800xt and its price. Definitely a win for consumers when MSRPs go down
the RX 7700XT is really bad value lol amd sucks at this point.
7800 xt for 500 bucks and you get Starfierld for free is "bad value?"
@@Mako2401who cares about starfield lmfao, gpu isn't worth the price over nvidia
@@Mako2401and what about the people that don't care about starfield?
@@krspy1337 Who cares about starfield?
@@karthik7282 People who dont care about starfield can buy a 4070, 600+ gpu with 12 gbs of vram and complain in a year or two about how nvidia played them .
kinda funny how nvidia was blamed for including frame generation and now when amd announces it everbody is excited for the tech... i think we should appreciate more what nvidia brings to the tech community then blaming them... for ex. dlss 1 and dlss now... (not for their price politics)
Love the frame generation and that it's probably gonna work with my older card, but I wish they would bring it back for video! It was a cool feature when I used to have a RX580
re bottom right corner... I'm way more surprised to see Biostar there tbh. They've been out of the spotlight for over a decade now. Still alive and kicking somehow, producing some seemingly decent, Asus-ROG-looking boards (Valkyrie series for both platforms) but nobody ever talks about them... or has any in stock. Can't say I can remember the last time seeing a Biostar branded GPU either...
IKR?
AMD has a history of putting up a nice-looking MSRP on paper but with ludicrously high actual AIB pricing even more so than Nvidia.
My guess is that the RX 7700 XT is priced as it is to allow the RX 6800 and RX 6800 XT to sell out. I expect that once the RX 6800 XT sells out, the price will drop by $50. Once the RX 6800 sells out, it'll drop another $50. AMD can't just put out a product that will prevent the sale of the products that are already out. In this way, AMD can sell out the 6000-series cards without having to take a loss on them.
I'd get a 6800 XT over the 7700 XT any day, even if the price difference is 100 bucks, but I think you may have a point. However, I think the small price difference is also because AMD is getting very high yields on the 7800 XT, and the actual manufacturing COST of the 7700 XT is actually very close to the 7800 XT. They don't care if the 7700 XT doesn't sell well, they just know that even at 450, it IS still somewhat competitive against both versions of the 4060 ti, and they know that they'll be able to lower the price to get it to sell enough units if/when they need to.
They will no doubt sell FAR more 7800 XTs than 7700 XTs in the long run.
The nature of their chiplet design is such that the vast majority of the main GPU chiplets won't have any defects, and apparently TSMC's defect rates have now become lower than initially estimated as well.
7900xt is around $750 new vs 7900xtx $960 new. For used cards its around 700 vs 850, so a $150 difference. If we give it the benefit of the doubt, 20% faster, it's a 21% price difference for used. 28% difference for new. At that rate you might as well just save the money for other components or for a future upgrqde and just go with the 7900xt, nearly 80-85% of the performance. Hardly an upsell compared to the 7700xt vs 7800xt.
While DLSS 3.0 will remain the better upscaler, this will be a great breath of life into these new (or old) cards!
i don't believe shit until reviews. it's the same marketing team that said 1.7X uplift for 7900xtx and we all know how that end up. would be some serious magic if 60 CU beats 72 when 80 CU GRE is slower in some games than 80 CU 6950.
they cannot lower the price of the 7700Xt cuz it comes with startfield, that is like 100 Dllrs discount, after the promo the price will lower.
The only thing that needs to change imo, is to drop the 7700 xt to 399, so at the price of the 8gb 4060 Ti but better with more vram
The 7800 XT will match the 6800 XT...for $150 less...two and a half years after the 6800 XT launched. That is NOT good. That is disappointing.
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation.
Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen (with original launch prices) as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounts on the 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has.
If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
If amd's benchmarks hold up to real world benchmarks, this'll be an amazing reason for people to buy amd.
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation.
Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounted 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has.
If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
when 7700XT drops to 350$ it'll be the value king
Now that frame generation is gonna be available to (almost) all gpus, people are suddenly excited about it
Exactly 😂
Nope no here. Haven’t had a game yet I can’t get 100+ fps at native max settings at 1440p on my 6800xt. Plus most games I play are mmo or FPS games which frame gen is not even wanted in those scenarios.
Definitely not excited. If my game runs at 60 with max settings I'm fine. And using it at 30 fps doesn't make sense, so I have no use case for this technology.
I'm not. I acknowledged that frame gen wasn't useless, but also didn't think it was that useful either. I'd much rather have 7% more raw performance than the option of being able to use frame-gen. You raise a good point though. A lot of people are biased and not consistent.
I am never biased or inconsistent though! Okay, maybe I can be too sometimes... :P
I mean.....its a drop from the hyper inflated prices of last gen, but its also only a fairly minor upgrade, over a gen that was already fairly weak.
Dont get me wrong, may still be the best value available, but its still pretty disappointing.
Inflation has been a lot higher than normal over the past three years.
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation.
Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen (with original launch prices) as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounts on the 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has.
If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
@@syncmonism yeah you summed that up way better than I would.
Thanks fam.
Vex casually being Vex with the Waifus😂
Think this is the best GPU launch this generation. 7800xt for $499 + Starfield is honestly the sweet spot. You get a lot of performance for that money. Plus if AntiLag+ and AMFM/FSR3 is good, AMD have a real winner on their hands. I can see a lot of folks being pretty happy with this GPU.
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT, that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has. Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's cards aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounted 6000 series.
If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
Well, maybe they're planning to launch a 7750xt or a 7800 non xt at the future, but the performance of 7800xt doesn't make sense, it has basically the same performance per watts of nvidia new gen and we all saw that nvidia was better in that aspect, if those infos are true then something happened behind the scenes, maybe some kind of upgrade in the architecture??
If AMD released the mid-range 7000 series sooner then they would *have* to price the cards higher than $500.
AMD had to sell the remaining 6000 series stock, which is valued between $500-$650 otherwise they'd just be competing with themselves.
Now we can have 6800xt/6900% rasterisation, with better RT, more efficient for cheaper.
Apparently some of their board partners also wanted to delay the launch because a bunch of those board partners also make Nvidia graphics cards, and a lot of those Nvidia cards haven't sold as well as they'd hoped, and the retail channels were getting clogged with overpriced Nvidia cards that hardly anybody was buying. The board partners wanted to wait a bit for more stuff to sell before trying to sell and send off more videocards, regardless of what brand they were.
It's far simpler than you think. AMD had/has an overstock of 6000 series GPUs. They needed those to clear channel. Better to risk bad online comments by overpricing the 7700XT (just like 7900XT previously) than to dramatically drop prices (losing profit or taking losses) on 10's of thousands of last gen cards. Once channel clears the entry to mid level 6000 series cards, the price of the 7700XT will drop to $399 or $389 where it belongs. They chose to make a DOA launch of the 7700XT rather than lose money on 6XXX cards with a lowered price. Not sure I agree it was worth the negative RUclipsr stuff but I guess they thought it was. Same thing they did with 7900XT. They had to wait for 69XX cards to clear channel before lowering the price or people would not want those and they would have to sharply discounts 10's of thousands of units down the road. Once they were closer to sold through, we now see an average price of $769 with 7900XT where it belonged. Sadly it probably hurt them more than dropping prices on previous gen and launching 7900XT and 7700XT at thier intended pricing but only they know. It's called managing stock and protecting profit margins. Losses on existing stock is aparently worse than losing potential sales on new unshipped products.
I think the board partners who also make Nvidia cards also wanted the channels to become a bit less congested, because they had gotten clogged with overpriced Nvidia graphics cards that hardly anybody was buying, namely the 4060 ti.
@@syncmonismI heard they are going to drop 4060ti 16GB to $449 immediately. Let the price wars begin!
I think the 7700 XT is priced at $450 so that when the 4060ti price is lowered to say
$450 then AMD can lower the price of the 7700 XT too.
7700xt will be doa but the 7800xt could be really good. Im stoked to hear about Anti Lag + as well. If they can make it as good as Reflex that'd be sweet.
I think it can revive itself with price cuts like the 7900 xt was
7700XT price vs. 7800XT price is the same as 7900XTX vs. XT pricing.
Also, there's high probability that 7800XT will be only marginally, if at all, faster than 6800XT. Worst case, just in between "ordinary" 6800 and 6800XT, considering the performance of 7900GRE.
At $500, the 7800 xt is going to be very popular especially on photo / video applications.
Hi guys, planning on buying an used gpu in Brazil and i am between the 6700xt for U$370 and the 6800xt for US620, do u think the upgrade is a great ideia or should i stick with the lower end one?
Those are so wildly differing price points it's impossible to say. Really depends on how much are YOU willing to spend.
I don't know how long it will take for the 7800 XT to become widely available in Brazil, but that could really help to push prices down further, especially for the 6800 XT.
Both are good cards. What's your monitor like? I would invest into a good 1440p monitor, or possibly even a 4k monitor, before getting anything better than a 6700 XT.
4k 32" monitors are particularly useful for document work, and I prefer curved over flat monitors any day, especially at the 32" size. Make sure you get a monitor which is freesync compatible, and preferably with a 120 hz or higher refresh rate too. 4k monitors with good refresh rates are perfectly viable for gaming, even if you don't have enough performance to actually run games at native 4k, because 4k is where upscaling is most useful. FSR is most competitive against DLSS when running at 4k with its highest quality setting, and a 6800 XT or 7800 XT is definitely capable of actually doing that.
7700 will be firm 450. Which will push 7800 up once sales take off. They are playing the market just as much as nvidia
I wouldn't count on that. There will certainly be more models of the 7800 XT that are over the MSRP, but I'm not so sure that the 7800 XT will be that hard to find for MSRP, especially after the first month or two.
Tempted to try the 7800xt (if the reviews turn out well) but also curious to see how Intel's Battlemage GPUs turn out, whenever they get announced in the next year.
Really want to upgrade from my 1080ti soon and was considering the 4070, whenever that gets to a good price but that may not happen for a while.
dont get a 4070 its overpriced for a small pef jump
Dont go for 4070, go for the ti instead
From what I can tell, the 7800 XT should be a bit behind a 6950 XT, maybe RTX 3090 level performance. Definitely good value if the price stays and we get a free Starfield on top.
Nah, this just screams overclocked 6800 XT performance at best. The 7900 GRE has 80 CUs and is barely 8% faster than a 6800 XT. The 7800 XT has 60 CUs, even if it does have more memory bandwidth I don't see it performing any better than the 7900 GRE, and in fact should be worse.
@@03chrisv That’s what’s strange though. When HW Unboxed tested the 7900 GRE in Last Of Us Part 1 vs the 4070 in 1440p, it was 8% faster. Here, for the 7800 XT, AMD tells us it is 9% faster. Possible explanations: “max settings” is different or AMD used a more midrange CPU with a midrange GPU, and driver overhead showed for the 4070.
@@03chrisv Plus we have previously leaked Timespy benchmark results that allow comparisons within the RDNA3 stack
Even if the 7800 XT has about the same standard raster performance as the 6800 XT (and the 4070), that would still make it about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT was when it first launched at 650 USD in 2020, IF you account for inflation.
Inflation has been a lot higher than normal in the last three years, which is why a lot of people are failing to properly account for this when trying to judge the value of graphics cards. Nvidia's prices aren't as bad as they look either, but they definitely aren't offering as much of an improvement over the previous gen (with original launch prices) as AMD is offering with both the 7000 series, and with the discounts on the 6000 series. 500 USD today (in 2023) is equivalent to about 425 USD in 2020, which is about 33% cheaper than the 6800 XT's launch price of 650 in 2020. That would be about a 50% improvement in performance vs. cost, in addition to whatever feature advantages the new RDNA3 architecture has.
If you compare the 7800 XT to the 6700 XT, the 6700 XT launched at 480 USD (which was a bloated price because of the GPU shortage), but was probably originally planned to launch at closer to around 400-430. Even compared to my estimated non bloated pricing for the 6700 XT, the 7800 XT at 500 USD today would still be offering roughly a 33% improvement in performance vs. cost (after adjusting for inflation), and the 7800 XT also has a 33% improvement in Vram capacity, and the new architecture also comes with some additional advantages on top of that. After two and a half years, that's not amazing compared to some of the improvement we've seen between graphics card generations over the past 20 years, but it's not that bad either, and it's a hell of a lot better than what Nvidia gave us with the 20 series and also now with the 40 series.
@mleise8292 I think AMD is being dishonest in their marketing material. They're basically saying that the 7800 XT is faster than the 7900 GRE which makes no sense. We will see when actual benchmarks come out, but my suspicion is that the 7800 XT is really supposed to be the 7800 non XT or maybe even a 7700 XT which is why the MSRP is $499 and the expected performance is underwhelming when compared to the 6800 XT.
Would a 7800 xt be ok with a ryzen 7 5800x or would it bottleneck too much????
Should be completely fine
Hmmm... does AMD Fluid Motion Frame (the frame generation) won't work for Vulkan? :/ I hope they'll add it, I mean, there're lots of games runs well if not better with Vulkan, and sometimes I do use DXVK to run some games...
I wonder why it's only for DX11/12, hmm.... still interesting though, definitely going to check 7800 XT out when it's in stock here in my city.
I'm guessing the implementation of this feature is a little bit hacky - after all they basically are just injecting frames into the framebuffer. I'm guessing this requires a different workaround for Vulkan - Vulkan is typically more stringent about things like this.
Older graphic cards (1000) allegedly is bad with asynchronous computing. Frame generation from AMD is based on using this.
About DX11/12 - probably easier than to do also DX10. Nvidia portal rtx works on games using DX9, so still DX11/12 sounds better for me
$269 7600 to $449 7700XT is a very big gap.
Are the Navi21 supposed to go to that bracket?
$400 6950XT & $300 6800, because they are not worth to be in the $499-$649 bracket.
Cryptoboom prices has not landed yet.
As long as it doesn't pull a 100W idle like the 7900xt(x) it sounds pretty good, but I have my doubts still
They already put a patch out that fixed the crazy high idle temps.
They basically did the same as they did with the 7900 series. Making the lower tier model look pointless. The 7800XT looks like a good offering though. The 7700XT should've been like 409,99 at most.
need some help what was the software that vex mentioned to uninstall and intall graphic drivers easy?