Carzy Zarx’s PC Gaming Emporium - Catch Up on All the Latest PC Gaming Related News

[Jizz_Beard_thePirate]

Conina said:

Captain_Yuri said:

6000 series are pretty terrible products when you realize that AMD is asking people to spend $650/$1000 on a GPU to Turn Off settings. It's amusing how on games that use heavy Ray Tracing, even Turing does better than the 6800 XT and that's before DLSS. You know... The GPUs that everyone said will age badly?

I was going to defend them, since RX 6800 + RX 6800 XT are quite fast in the newest games (AC Valhalla, Dirt 5, Watch Dogs Legion).

So if you aren't very interested in raytracing or VR games, they will deliver a good performance for years, especially their VRAM makes them quite future proof.

Unfortunately(?) I'm very interested in raytracing reflections, raytracing shadows/lighting and in VR games.

But until they have a solution similar to DLSS to even out the performance hit of activated raytracing, I'm better off with Ampere.

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2020-amd-radeon-rx-6800-and-6800-xt-review?page=5 

Control with RTX activated (which looks awesome!) in 1440p brings an RX 6800 down to 33 fps on average with slowndowns to 25 fps. Thanks to DLSS2.0 I'm playing Control on my RTX 3070 with RTX activated and in the highest 1440p-settings with 60 - 100 fps.

Both AC and Dirt 5 are AMD sponsored titles so it makes sense as to why those perform better on 6000 series. WatchDogs Legion seems to be on par with the 3080 on some reviews but behind on a lot of others from what I can tell unless you go 1080p. And RT is broken for Watchdogs Legion on AMD cards so I wouldn't believe any RT benchmarks.

We have seen the Vram capacity theory before many times as AMD always had more Vram than Nvidia but we have never seen it become a major factor so I doubt it will be the case outside of edge cases. Especially with the bandwidth advantage of the 3000 series as there's more to Vram than just capacity.