@JEMC Cheers, that's some solid advice. Think I'll wait it out and see 🙏 Yeah it's a good deal but like you said we don't have the full picture until the 4070 comes out.

Have a feeling things might go down even more as retailers try get rid off old stock. Then there's deals for the 6700XT lol. Idk..

Man this gen sucks when you're desperate for a new GPU at this price range.

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a price drop of Nvidia's Ampere cards, but I'm more optimistic about the AMD cards.

And yeah, Ampere/RDNA2 could have been great, but we got the f*cking crypto BS that ruined it. And this gen, well, the problem seems to be greed, plain and simple.

Yeah Nvidia are too stubborn to charge less for even older cards. At least there are some good RDNA 2 DGPU's deals to be had, but it still kinda feels bad buying into these cards when they are essentially 2 years old, EOL stock. The only other alternative is to pay slightly more for newer tech, but also goes backwards in some ways like in total bus, or a lesser amount of VRAM. That, or go full hog with the 4090, but thats way out of my budget.

Its just a little depressing to see that an old last gen card is still one of the best value cards you can get rn. Like by now we should have mid ranged GPU's with 16GB VRAM standard with next gen GPU's. But here we are with sub $600 192-bit XX60 tier cards with 12GB VRAM barely enough to keep up with last gen.

The annoying this is, is the obvious market segmentation where the 'mid ranged' buyers are totally f'd waiting for these mid cards and we're charged a premium for the privelege for it. Such a shame because the hardware they have is great but the way all of this is handled and at eregious prices makes it all crap.

Hopefully with the 4070 release we'll see a turning point in all this madness. And at least the 7800 XT should be quite a bit under $600. So, thats something lol.

The age old debate about value vs features. Radeon cards with more vram and likely more performance vs Nvidia with limited vram and less performance for a similar price but cutting edge features.

I'd personally go Nvidia because in my view, PC gaming is about cutting edge features. I don't want the console experience with more fps, I want the PC experience hence why I am paying more instead of settling on a ps5. But it's hard to deny that Nvidia has really been doubling down on greed this gen more so than Radeon for sure.

Also Nvidia has a lot better track record and much better industry wide support. RDNA 3 for example has issues with emulators where as RTX 4000 series doesn't. Radeon in general has issues with certain OLED monitors because their Freesync Premium pipeline has weird nonsense going on while Nvidia GPUs have either no issues or issues that are fixable vs that aren't with any Radeon GPUs:

This isn't the only monitor either as the same issues apply with Alienware versions. And the list goes on like DLSS 3 which you know is going to be better than FSR 3 and Nvidia with VSR support. Etc etc.

So imo, I think you should wait for the 4070 or a price drop for RDNA 3. I don't think getting a 6800XT in 2023 will be worth it, least not before seeing how the 4070 performs. If the 7900XT gets cheap enough, it may be worth a look as well.

Both manufacturers AMD and nVidia have issues with their GPU's/Software/Drivers... And both have their individual quirks.

nVidia for example is not as good as AMD when it comes to triple-monitor display support... Specifically there is some odd display sleep behaviour on nVidia triple monitor systems that just doesn't happen with AMD.

I suggest any individual not to buy into the fervent recommendations of the masses and actually look into these (expensive) components before hitting that buy button... And specifically look into how these cards handle in your specific use-case scenarios. - Read some reviews.
Everyone plays different games, everyone uses these parts for different uses. (I.E. Transcode/Decoding/Encoding/Compute/Modelling etc') - So one persons usage is not going to be representative of the next persons.

If you can save some cash by going with a different company, then all the power to you.

Yeah, same old song haha. While do care for value; especially when spending so much on a GPU, I do want this GPU to last as long as it can and feature sets does also play a big role in that. And while I do think the 6800XT will outperform the 4070 in raster and will most definately be cheaper than even a stock MSRP 4070. Idk if the extra features of the Nvidia will completely outshine the older RDNA 2 card in most titles I play. And future titles going forward.

But yeah think that's probably the safest thing to do. With reviews coming within this week and launch by next Friday, things should be a lot clearer by then. Who knows maybe RTG can pull off something really worthwhile with FSR 3.0, or not.

Yeah both have their pro's and cons. With last gen RDNA 2 had the slight advantage with power efficiency. Nvidia has the advantage of using its own technologies while which has been one step ahead of the game in software. This time Nvidia seems to have the advantage of both but costs more with lesser specs.

And true the games are where its at and Radeon cards do seem more performant in some games like CoD games that use the IW engine. CS Go (soon to be CS 2) seems to run better on Nvidia GPU's.. hmm. Think waiting for benchmarks and weighing in my options is the best bet. Think I'll be going on a mad research thing before pulling the trigger on the buy button on any of these GPU's lol.

And cheers for the input guys. Appreciate it!

I'd go for the 6800XT unless you want to use lots of raytracing. Then the 4070 would be more appealing.

But since Raytracing uses a lot of VRAM, I'm not sure if the 4070 has enough of it for more than the next 2 years anyway; so in that case I would suggest going for a 4080 or 4090 instead unless you plan to upgrade in 2025/26.

Yep, at less than 400€ starting price the 6700XT is actually good value now, especially compared to the competition: It's in the same price bracket as the 3060, while the 3060Ti (starting at 440€) sits in between the 6750XT (starting at 410€) and the 6800XT (560€, base 6800 is actually more expensive than the XT models right now on Mindfactory) and 3070 (530€)

@bolded: This is why I won't buy a Laptop with a 3060 or below in it, I won't go below 8GB VRAM. Right now that leaves me with exactly 2 laptop options that I'll choose from under 1500€ with AZERTY keyboard layouts: 

1. Lenovo Legion 5 Pro 16 (Ryzen 7 6800H, RTX 3070 and a great 1600p 165hz 500nits screen, 1TB SSD, or
2. ASUS TUF Gaming A16 Advantage Edition (Ryzen 7 7735HS (so basically the same CPU), Radeon 7600S (performance-wise, it should be in between a desktop 6600 and 6600XT with tendency to the latter), less bright 1200p screen and just 512GB SSD

The Lenovo is right now almost 1000€ off (original price is 2429€), so both cost around 1500€, but there's no guarantee this discount will last until the point where I can afford to buy that laptop. Pretty much all other laptops with similar specs available here are closer or even past 2000€.

To be fair my notebook with the Intel 11400H+Geforce 3060 6GB+8GB Ram(Then upgraded it to 64GB of Ram) went on sale for about $950 AUD, so at that specific price point, it was the best value you could buy at the time. Heck, it's still stupidly good value even today compared to other devices in this price point which are normally integrated graphics or Geforce 3050 4GB/Radeon RX 560 or something.

I would still make the same purchase if I was looking for a sub $1,000 notebook even today as it's still a bargain at that price... It's just a shit sandwich that the GPU is *more* capable and could fully utilise *more* than 6GB of VRAM, but it ended up with less.
If I had the option for an 8GB variant, I would have jumped all over it.

It's actually a similar issue I had years ago with an old Pentium M Dothan @1.6Ghz + Mobility Radeon 9700 laptop that I had, it only came with 64MB of VRAM, when it really needed 128MB or better yet, 256MB... Then it would have handled Oblivion and Fallout 3 far far far better.

Nvidia's DLSS 2 vs. AMD's FSR 2 in 26 Games, Which Looks Better? - The Ultimate Analysis

And this is exactly what I mean when I say Nvidia is better with cutting edge features. At no point during their comparison was FSR superior. Infact at best, FSR tied but majority of the time, DLSS is superior to far superior. And the lower the resolution, the better DLSS was relative to FSR. Nvidia isn't just about Ray Tracing but with DLSS and/or Reflex, they are superior with Raster titles as well.

AMD Cuts Ryzen 9 7950X3D & 7900X3D Prices After 7800X3D Launch, Other Ryzen 7000 CPUs Also Discounted

https://wccftech.com/amd-cuts-ryzen-9-7950x3d-7900x3d-prices-after-7800x3d-launch-other-ryzen-7000-cpus-also-discounted/

If only the GPU market had price drops like this

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 production reportedly shifts to TU106 GPU

https://videocardz.com/newz/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1650-production-reportedly-shifts-to-tu106-gpu

Interesting as that means fused off 2060 dies. Might perform above it's weightclass in certain scenarios like when the 2060 KO had fused of 2080 dies and it certain applications, performed crazy good.

Cyberpunk 2077 With NVIDIA RT Overdrive Mode & Path Tracing To Be 30-40% More GPU Intensive, DLSS 3 Allows Over 100 FPS on RTX 4090

https://wccftech.com/cyberpunk-2077-nvidia-rt-overdrive-mode-path-tracing-40-percent-more-gpu-intensive-dlss-3-100-fps-rtx-4090/

I'll likely give this a go. Gonna need a 5070 to bring this to main stream, that's for sure.