CrustyBritches
Gold Member
You wouldn't say that...but it just happened. They got of whiff of the 2060S oc perf/$ and ripped on for their blower, so they had to drop.
Last edited:
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Radeon 5700 & 5700XT First benchmarks published prematurely
- Thread starter Ascend
- Start date
Screamer-RSA
Member
I guess we will see when official reviews drop but 5700 and 5700 XT will sit nicely between the 2070/2060 super. nVidia knows how fast these cards are hence the quick "refresh". They always want to control the conversation and are technically already telling us how fast these cards are, faster than the OG 2060/2070 .
Last edited:
ethomaz
Banned
So why the price cut? It is clear that AMD knows how fast SUPER is and choose to drop it even before launch.
That is the complete opposite of what you are trying to say.
Last edited:
Maybe, or they baited Nvidia into price point they dont find sweet against AMDs 329$.
Like I give a shit about RT on card that is 3x slower then their flagship which already struggles with it.
GHG
Member
If these new AMD cards had ray tracing then I probably would have gone for the 5700XT over the 2070S, especially considering the new lower prices. I'd really liked to have been able to support AMD.
But as it stands I can't justify going into next gen with a card without hardware RT support.
But as it stands I can't justify going into next gen with a card without hardware RT support.
CrustyBritches
Gold Member
I love AMD/Ati as much as the next guy. Probably had a dozen of their cards going back to 9500 Pro, same with CPU going back to K6-2. They're not in a position to play games compared to the other way around. Going by AMD's own numbers, they had to drop.
RT is just the cherry on top. It's kinda stuck in limbo right now, but a game like DOOM Eternal could change all that in a heartbeat.
Last edited:
DynamiteCop!
Banned
DemonCleaner
Member
nah, amd having a blower fan and nvidia decent cooling will likely mean that Navi has better OC potential this time around and that the AIB 2700XT card's will be pretty close to the 2070S for 100 bucks less.
i probably griped about the navi prices second to non on here and i think both cards are still $50 to much after the price drop, but i don't think it's all that bad now. and however the price drops came to be, i struggle to see how anyone can say that's a bad thing? what would have been the alternative? dropping prices two months later? early adaptors would have been furious...
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
Yeah I will always find this utterly baffling. I don't mind people having the opinion that Nvidya is better. But to express that in a gloating 'AMD is doomed I'll never buy them!' kind of way is crazy.
It's like deliberately shaving a small slice off your own nose with your razor each morning and then being dumbstruck why you're bleeding (or at least your wallet is).
Last edited:
The 5700 XT was intended to compete with the 2070 which – according to the early benchmarks at least – it does. If Nvidia lowers the price of the 2070 (by re-releasing it as the 2060 Super), then obviously AMD has to lower their prices, since if both products have similar performance, the lower price wins.
thelastword
Banned
Great, better to do it before release than after, like Nvidia with their $500 2080, which they call the 2070 Super at $200 less....
Looking at the benches in the OP again, 5700 beats 2060 Super and 5700XT matches 2070 Super in raw power, should bode well for AMD here...….This should help reviewers recommend the cards even more.....Anniversary is now $50 less, the benchmarks for anniversary vs 5700 Super should be very interesting indeed, and these are not even the day 1 drivers with which those benches were made...
One thing I've realized is that Navi is a beast with DX11, that should help a tonne with older titles and even some recent DX11 titles where Radeon was already ahead of Nvidia...….The 7th is approaching quickly, can't wait....
Mattyp
Not the YouTuber
Last edited:
JareBear: Remastered
Banned
Is it true that Vega improved significantly over time with driver updates? If so, can same be expected from Navi?
The Skull
Member
I believe it did and same to be expected with Navi, as the architecture is a quite different to standard GCN so improvements will probably be made over time.
Leonidas
Member
Not true for Vega. Vega 64, two years later, still only roughly matches 1080 and 1070 Ti is still faster than Vega 56.
Last edited:
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
Good move by AMD. At the new prices, they're great choices vs the comp.
Leonidas
Member
AMD had no choice but to cut prices. Navi looked like terrible value before the price cut, as reasonable people have been saying ever since Super was revealed.
After the price cut the value of Navi is no better than it was back at E3. 8-12% lower prices compared to E3, but in that time Nvidia cards got 15% faster...
After the price cut the value of Navi is no better than it was back at E3. 8-12% lower prices compared to E3, but in that time Nvidia cards got 15% faster...
Last edited:
thelastword
Banned
Absolutely, it's a new architecture, drivers will improve game performance even more in time...….Even on Vega I've been seeing recent DX11 games doing pretty well on Vega, even eclipsing Pascal and Turing in DX11, (Kingdom Come, COD, Resident Evil, DMC etc...)......Then in the DX11 tests in the early benchmarks in the OP, Navi comes out ahead in Timespy DX11, which means, 5700XT beats 2070 Super and 5700 beats 2060 Super.......
I think Wolfenstein Performance is a bit dicey now, but it's early drivers, and Nvidia is using VRS on that to heighten perf....I hope people are not forgetting that AMD had the lead on that title, till NV implemented VRS there.......I was of the opinion that Navi would have VRS, so we will have to see more on that at launch, if they implmented it or not.....or maybe perhaps later they will...
https://wccftech.com/amd-next-gen-r...-launch-with-upcoming-rx-navi-graphics-cards/
As far as I'm concerned, even day 1 drivers should be better than what's in that benchmark, and yet these early benchmarks are not bad at all for AMD, very encouraging that they are matching Super already...So when the AIB cards come with Axial fans, you will see even better perf even without better drivers per se, but I have a feeling that these cards will undervolt and OC very well.....I'm thinking XT can easily get to over 2000 Mhz with an undervolt on the blower cooler, Axial fans will take them even higher, perhaps 2100Mhz...
The Mad Draklor
Member
Not sure about the Windows drivers, but Vega did see a good improvement from the open source drivers.
thelastword
Banned
Why would they still go ahead with this video with the new info on Navi...….Leadbetter is going on and on about NV features.....What features? RTX is in less than 1% of games? DLSS was laughed out the short bus and did Leadbetter just use VRS and Mesh Shading as features?
If you have to listen to these guys you would think they were paid by Nvidia.......The guy praised Radeon 7 as a great card for his content creation in one of his videos, but still says it's an OK card in this one, because I guess Leadbetter plays all his games at 4k 60fps, when I'm pretty sure he does more content creation than playing games, so how could you call Radeon 7 ok, when it's a better card for the work you do than the $1200 2080ti? So clearly, Radeon 7 has it's market...That's why I believe AMD should bring on the 5800 and 5900 pronto, Radeon 7 will have it's niche anyway with that 16Gb of Vram...., but knowing AMD, they might want to put 16Gb on the 5900XT anyway......Oh Well, even if they did, we would not stop hearing about NV features....Leadbetter said, that Nvidia features are Raytracing, RTX, VRS, Mesh Shading, AI...…..You realize how many redundant terms he used there and you tell me these guys are not receiving a paycheck....I'm surprised he didn't say Freesync….
Speaking of features, AMD has no features it appears....I guess Fidelity FX, Radeon Image Sharpening, Radeon Chill, HBCC, Radeon Anti Lag and the new RDNA that has (new compute units, new instructions better suited for visual effects, and multi-level cache hierarchy for greatly reduced latency and highly responsive gaming). means nothing, only Nvidia has features.....
Surely the question is not how many games raytracing features in now, but how many it will feature in, in the future, when consoles with hardware assisted raytracing are shipping.
Leadbetter didn't call it "ok". That was John. Leadbetter said it was a "pretty decent card" for his use case.
His point was that a lot of customers were looking for something that could actually match the overall performance of the 2080.
Last edited:
Ascend
Member
Leaving this here... A long watch, but, definitely worth it. Short version? According to this dude, Navi IS the Zen of GPUs, but it simply is not obvious yet... nVidia's architecture is a black box and developers don't like it, and AMD now has the support of practically every large company out there. With the weaknesses of GCN out of the picture, a large Navi die can take over the performance crown again.
alabtrosMyster
Member
Yeah, I've noticed that for the last couple of years and wondered where that was coming from... this and "fine wine technology" (not pure B.S. but not something I would count on, as I don't know the future.
thelastword
Banned
Yes, but that is what, 1.5 to 2 years away? Why would you buy a raytracing card for limited support now, when the real raytracing cards would be landing then...…...No one in their right mind is buying 2060S, 2070S for raytracing, even the 2080 and 2080ti don't make too much sense for raytracing, especially at their ridiculous prices, they're still not giving you great rez and performance with RT anyway.....Look at Leadbetter's RTX Super review, these super cards are barely getting 30fps at 1080p in Quake 2....2060 is averaging 25fps...
It makes more sense to buy a regular card now, most of the people with Turing cards play at high frames and high rez instead and max out settings the old rasterized way, because the RT hardware on these cards are just not powerful enough, it's not ready for primetime......So it makes no sense to speak up RTX when the offerings are so limited and the cards are not good enough yet to push the feature to any noticeable degree.....Now, if you had hundreds of RTX games. or every single game coming out had RTX and the hardware was viable, that would be a different story, but that is only likely to happen, not even in late 2020, but rather, early to mid 2021...….
It makes no sense to buy these barebones RTX cards now at a high price, when a cheaper non RTX card can give you the 1440p gaming you crave....So when RTX technology is ready and the GPU's can handle it at 1440p or 4k at 60fps at reasonable prices, then you buy them....Meanwhile you have two years to enjoy high FPS rasterized gaming before RTX comes to everything including toasters....enjoy that and save some cash.....
------
Oh, and yes, Leadbetter called the Radeon 7 OK too, in gaming, but in his review of Super cards, we saw the Radeon V beating the 2080 in some games and yet Leadbetter's game catalogue is filled with NV favored games anyway.....AC Unity, AC Oddysey, Crysis etc.....
Two takeaways from that video that was absolutely appalling though, was how Leadbetter does not retest games on all cards, says it's too much...If you did Radeon 7 benches at the time it launched and keep using those results by only benching the newer cards you review, you're doing it wrong, so what about all those games that received performance improvements through newer drivers.? Another thing that he mentioned that "I don't know", it sounds like something Leonidas would say, it was so bad, I keed you not......is that....AMD is justifying the high prices that Nvidia had on Turing....I mean what in the F....is he talking about? This is absurd...….Cards in the 380-500 range justifies Nvidia's $600, 800, 1200, 2400 prices on Turing? that has to be the most bollocks I've ever heard from Leadbetter tbqh......and he has said many a puzzling/head-shaking things in the past...
llien
Banned
5% cheaper card that is on par perf wise is "terrible".
Those glasses of yours...
And don't feed me the RT crap that is not only nowhere to be seen, but is also disabled by many owners due to perf impact even in those rare games, that have it.
Last edited:
thelastword
Banned
If anything, the Super cards define the word "PANIC"...…….Launching and reviewing a set of cards that's not even on store shelves yet...…..Slashing the 2080 from $700 to $500...…….NV fans were so confident in the worth of the RTX cards at their original prices, but Nvidia heard Navi was coming to crush those cards and Jensen Huang started sweating bullets......Can't have Turing selling even worse with Navi beating it's competitors solidly in benches......
If reviewers are fair, I hope you know that the $350 5700 goes against the RTX 2060, the $400 dollar 5700XT goes against the $500 vanilla RTX 2070 and the 5700XT Anniversary goes against the 2070 Super...…...
Now, what everybody keeps telling me is "RTX man RTX", but if "RTX was such a great game-changing feature on Turing, it would sell the cards now wouldn't it? Now the youtubers are doing the marketing for Nvidia, "Oh RTX", but it's clearly not working. OTOH, If Nvidia was so convinced of this RTX feature, then why are they so worried about some crap Navi-No RTX cards, why did they drop NON-RTX cards themselves?…...Surely, they should have not bothered with Super, because as Leadbetter said "he would pay more just for RTX"...So yes, Nvidia should have just left Turing as it is, because no-one in their right mind would pass a non-RTX card for an RTX one, even if the RTX card is much more expensive right?
Ivellios
Member
To everyone saying " RTX is worthless on anything below 2080ti"
While this may be true, id rather have the option to experience the poor man RTX on a 2060S playing something like Metro Exodus, Control or any single player game at 1080p/30 FPS than not ever having this option if i go with a RX5700XT.
While this may be true, id rather have the option to experience the poor man RTX on a 2060S playing something like Metro Exodus, Control or any single player game at 1080p/30 FPS than not ever having this option if i go with a RX5700XT.
llien
Banned
There is nothing wrong with that.
Bar the fact that it makes performance talk useless, as it applies regardless of performance of 5700 cards.
sircaw
Banned
I not a pc gamer anymore but rather play on consoles. There are a gazillion people always saying how terrible and shit 30 fps is etc which is fair enough. I just find it funny and abit strange now that so many people are happy to say its fine with rtx.
Was it not the other day that nvidia talked about their next generation architecture, i find that really strange too, their releasing there brand new Supers but are telling people don't worry we have new cards are just round the corner for you to buy. It almost feels a bit shady to me, like sort sort of cash grab before the really cool stuff hits. I means it people money ofc but people spending + 400 bucks on a card to play at 30 seems, i dont know very wrong to me.
As for the wanting to experience the poor mans Rtx i totally get what your saying but i wonder if or how quickly you would turn back to 60 over 30.
Chairman Tickles
Banned
I guarantee that 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of people that have the option between 30-40fps with RTX on or 80-120 fps with RTX off will choose RTX off.
thelastword
Banned
It's just so strange that the guys always saying 1080ti, 4k 60fps, Nvidia cards are faster, more frames, 60Hz, 120fps, 144fps, always denigrating console gaming as 30fps slideshows.....are now all about 1080p 30-40fps, and this is not even real raytracing btw, it's still hybrid.....
Self_Destructive
Member
It's nice to have options.
Likewise the guys who are alright with 1080p 30-40fps console gaming saying it's perfectly fine...are now all about it being completely unacceptable... even when pushing the most demanding computationally expensive rendering techniques running in real-time...... The beauty of course being that on PC you get to choose. A PC gamer could definitely be the type of person always talking about 4K, 60fps, Nvidia this and that, more frames, 144hz ect ect... and still be an informed person who understands the reasoning of why RT is so computationally expensive... and based on that fact could be perfectly cool with dropping their standards to enable it if they choose. The fact that it's so strange to you is what's actually strange to me... but I guess that's because you don't have the option in the first place..
And lmao with the "it's not even real RT" bullshit. It IS real ray tracing... you're either tracing rays, or you're not. It doesn't matter how much of the scene you RT... that's not some qualifier. Are you not going to consider it real until everything is completely path traced? LMAO please...
Last edited:
Unknown Soldier
Banned
It's not real for those people until AMD has it, duh.
It makes no sense to buy these barebones RTX cards now at a high price, when a cheaper non RTX card can give you the 1440p gaming you crave....So when RTX technology is ready and the GPU's can handle it at 1440p or 4k at 60fps at reasonable prices, then you buy them....Meanwhile you have two years to enjoy high FPS rasterized gaming before
I'm eager to read his mental gymnastics with the RT solution Sony is heading for. Let's see how real their RT is.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
Except for the fact that not one title is 100% fully ray traced. The RTX titles have certain effects that are ray traced, but none of them are fully ray traced. Rasteurization is still needed to keep the game playable. Based on what I have seen Metro Exodus provides the best use of ray tracing. Shadow of the Tomb Raider was very disappointing. So there is some validity to saying it's not real RT.
The only fully ray traced title we have is Quake 2 RTX and I am not even positive that is 100% ray traced.
Last edited:
thelastword
Banned
Console gaming is about giving me the best looking games with modest hardware, not giving me the most computationally expensive rendering technique that's not feasible on PC hardware at the moment....
Don't you realize that every time Nvidia introduces any feature it's always a resource hog? Hairworks, Smokeworks, PhysX, Turing Raytracing......You think there are not less intensive solutions to these? So AMD did TressFX which is more impressive, Radeon Rays won't be as resource hungry as Turing RT......Any new Nvidia feature is barely workable on their brand new GPU's, their mid-low end, you just turn that off....Just go back to any new feature they introduced through gameworks…...Frames cut in half, so their high end was always barely making it with their new features, but they introduced it anyway, because they wanted to leave room to sell their next round of cards, buy an expensive card now that barely does RTX to buy another expensive card later that finally gives you the performance you actually wanted, when you bought the first card, get it...…..Hey look, our brand new 3080ti on 7nm EUV, makes the 2080ti look like a 1030 with DDR4, you can now do RT at 1440p -4k 60fps with maxed settings in every game says Nvidia......The cycle continues....
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
Suddenly 1080p gaming @ 40 fps high settings is the new benchmark because of RT and Nvidia. It's like we're going back in time 5 years.
Let's cut the bullshit. If the choice is between a $50 cheaper card or one with RT features that tanks performance, no-one should be choosing the latter. It's a total gimmick at this point, especially on the 2060/S and 2070/S level of card.
Let's cut the bullshit. If the choice is between a $50 cheaper card or one with RT features that tanks performance, no-one should be choosing the latter. It's a total gimmick at this point, especially on the 2060/S and 2070/S level of card.
thelastword
Banned
I'm not sure it is either, people just say anything for NVIDIA marketing at this point...Soon they'll be saying PONG is fully raytraced, but you will need a 2080ti to play it at 1080p 60fps...…"Then the NV fandom and youtubers would go" Oh man, this is so transformational, you have not experienced Pong unless you've played it with raytracing, it looks like a brand new game......Well? what are you waiting for? Go buy a $1200 2080ti to experience this glory pronto, it's well worth it....
That game Control though, mark my words, this will put these RTX cards to their knees, you guys don't know Remedy, I swear........If Quake 2 on a RTX 2060 was only averaging 24fps at 1080p, better brace up for some more slidey RTX frames, it's NV's best and most important feature afterall…
Yeah, no doubt, $1200 $800, 600, 500, 400 for demoing RTX, in what? 4 Games after a year, good investment man...People should be publically flogged if they don't buy an RTX card over a cheaper NON RT one...…..The value of RTX just sells itself you know.....
Self_Destructive
Member
You're sounding like the idiot fanboys that say "You spent $1200 on a GPU just to play X game at Y resolution and only get Z framerate".. when making an argument about wasting money on PC gaming over console gaming. Completely ignoring the fact that ALL games performance is improved, there's tons of different games people play, and you can do a shit load more with a PC than a console.
"4 games after a year... good investment man"... Yep.. I bought the RTX just for those 4 games dude!
This shows just how well Nvidia has penetrated your mind. RTX = RT to you. To me RTX = the most advanced GPUs with the most features and performance. That's definitely worth the investment for me. Wake me up when AMD beats that.
Indeed. Let's cut the bullshit. If $50 was enough to make people consider AMD cards over Nvidia cards... the the GPU marketshare landscape would look extremely different than it does right now... The fact is that it is NOT... and that's ignoring the fact that now Nvidia actually supports ray tracing while AMD does not. They can't compete at that price even on their best day... what makes you think they're going to now?
bubut it's a gimmick!
LOL yeah sure it is. You guys got to stop abusing the fuck out of that word. People used to call 4K a gimmick as well... Everything is a gimmick when your favorite company is incapable of it.
Last edited:
Insane Metal
Gold Member
Also keep in mind that the 5800, 5900 and 5950 have already been registered. Probably not coming soon, but definetely coming.
Anyway, AMDs business now is consoles and data centers.
Anyway, AMDs business now is consoles and data centers.
JareBear: Remastered
Banned
Every time I think I know which card I am going to upgrade to, a new thread pops up and changes my mind. Back and forth back and forth back and forth.
Ughhhhh
Ughhhhh
llien
Banned
Oh, please stop.
"Real RT" means having entire scene rendered using ray tracing. (Pixar does it)
That is "maybe one day" pipe dream.
All we have at this moment is some effects on top of rasterization, and even those effects are HEAVILY denoised to look somewhat realistic.
Which is still kind a cool, aint it? Except Crytek has demoed it on Vega56, with no dedicated (overpriced) RT hardware whatsoever:
For RT to take off consoles must embrace it. But when that happens, it would be done AMD way, not nVidia's. And AMD's approach, as we learned, is different, with leaner RT cores.
Bench for waitmarks.
That being said, I'm sooo likely to do all amd build, once AIB's are out with Navi.
Rumors have them in August.
Last edited:
Ivellios
Member
Same here, though im more inclined for the 2060S for now.
But i will see how Navi performs tomorrow on benchmarks before i make any decision.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
Realistically, it all depends on what you want to spend.
If you have $500 to spend get the 2070 Super. If you have $400, you have to decide if (potentially) slightly better performance but no ray tracing, or slightly inferior performance, but the opportunity to preview what a ray tracing gaming future might look like.
It's really that simple, Chunk.
Last edited: