Out of 3 games they released benchmarks for 1 was faster on Big Navi compared to 3080, one was slower and was on par. It's comfortably above 2080TI and pretty close to 3080.
Only naive people expect 3070 to be above 2080Ti
How much faster do you expect the 3070 to be? According to nVidia's own slides it's actually on par to the 2080 Ti. I wouldn't be surprised if it's actually only 5% faster on average (if not at best).
I think Techpowerup doesn't use Ultra settings for all their games.
Yeah this is the other issue with AMD, the drivers for 5700XT were an absolute disaster for over 6 months. RDNA was AMD's first actual new architecture for almost a decade at that point, so we now know good AMD drivers really are without recycling GCN over and over and they are shockingly awful.
you have to be more clear dude
I was really hoping that AMD would bring the thunder. It really sucks having only 1 high end GPU maker. At least Nvidia quasi pulled their heads out of their ass with the pricing of the 30xx series.
Infinite Cache is the new FP32 secret AMD sauce.
Aligns well with "3080 was a hotfix to counter Big Navi" theory.
For some reason, they say, NV/Intel users are those who suffer from bad AMD drivers the most.
I'm not even sure if it is 5%-10% behind. It looks to be the same performance if we use Techspot numbers...
How would nvidia know what is coming? People need to be real about this. It's not like nvidia has a saboteur inside of AMD or AMD is telling nvidia that their performance is going to be this or that.
NV definitely has "friends" at AIBs. Likely at TSMC too.
It also seems likely that 3080/3090 were a partial/paper launch to get some hype out in front of Big Navi. Rumors seem to indicate proper stock wasn't available at the time of launch.
Probably smart by being a little ambiguous. I trust DF and Guru3d to deliver solid results. However, let's say that going by Gears 5 that Big Navi is anywhere from equal to 10% behind a 3080. That's an excellent result for AMD.
For what it is worth (I expect "big navi" to be between 3070 and 3080, closer to 3080, and 3080 to be missing in action for months to come):
www.pcworld.com
What? 3090 is almost a thousand bucks cheaper than previous Titans...
it's basically neck and neck by their numbers from those two benchmarks we have, but it's not much to go on with at this point. Still, not looking too shabby for AMD, especially if they can undercut Nvidia by a decent price point.Hexus have a comparison here:
Also:
"Most importantly, Herkelman stressed that AMD didn’t state which Radeon RX 6000 graphics card ran these benchmarks. We don’t know whether these results come from the biggest Big Navi GPU, or a more modest offering. "
AMD’s Radeon RX 6000 ‘Big Navi’ performance tease reveals an RTX 3080 rival
During AMD's Ryzen 5000 launch even, the company provided a performance preview of its upcoming Radeon RX 6000 graphics cards, and they look ready to go toe-to-toe with Nvidia's beastly RTX 3080.
Otherwise, the biggest question that remains for another day is which video card these performance numbers are for. It’s a very safe bet that this is AMD’s flagship GPU (expected to be Navi 21), however AMD is purposely making it unclear if this is their lead configuration, or their second-tier configuration.
AMD Teases Radeon RX 6000 Card Performance Numbers: Aiming For 3080?
www.anandtech.com
I wonder why that could be?
Welp, remember that what you get is just a retail card.
Since 3080 is a phantom release with no real availability, they are not likely to undercut by much, if at all.
There is no sign there ever was a driver problem with 5700 series.
For what it is worth (I expect "big navi" to be between 3070 and 3080, closer to 3080, and 3080 to be missing in action for months to come):
Come on really? I think competitors have some idea about what their competition may be doing.
Do you not realize that stuff is under very heavy NDA? Companies don't take lightly to that info being given to a competitor. If AIB was caught sharing that info with a competitor AMD could sue them into oblivion.
Compared to previous years no IMO.
Is this because lot of emulators used to use OpenGL? I thought most have added Vulkan renderers or just Direct3D by now.
Console emulation?
Yes, but it usually sucks, and they take a while to be as stable as OpenGL.
Yes.
Yeah for me I like the extra VRAM. I understand your point though.
They teased it today this is the chart they showed.
For a 10% boost over 3080, it's a joke. I canceled my order after the reviews came out. The Asus Strix 3080 850 euros the 3090 cost me 1900 for a 10% boost in certain titles
In Borderlands RDNA1 actually performed quite a bit worse than RTX cards. Gears 5 was a win for RTX as well, although this was pretty close. If AMD wanted to pick games that performed better with their cards then they could have chosen some other titles. I think AMD was just displaying confidence by showing benchmarks in games that are not known to be strongest performers for them.
Didn't know 3080 was a midrange card. Good to know, I was wondering why the performance was so underwhelming.
It gets better performance for half the price of a 2080ti... How is that underwhelming? Especially when you compare it to AMD cards over the past couple of releases? If my memory serves me right, AMD performance on raytracing, from what we have seen, is behind Nvidia by a margin at least. Not only that, but there's still no evidence they can combat DLSS, which makes it even less appealing. Even with a cheaper price, AMD won't get my money unless it can trade blows in rasterization, ray tracing, and can go toe to toe with DLSS. Otherwise, it's a no buy/skip this product.
The point flew right over your head.
It's underwhelming because it gets that level of performance at crazy TDP. It's also underwhelming for only having 10GB VRam, less than 2080TI. And only offering 20% over 2080TI in 1440 is hardly something to write home about.
Which was what exactly? It being a midrange card? I don't necessarily agree with that exactly. But it's not exactly wrong either. There could be a possible 2 SKU's at a higher tier than the 3080. A TI and possibly a Titan, since the 3090 was marketed as a gaming card. I would consider it a mid-high tier gpu if the above is correct, more so a high end card though.
And that is my exact reason for not having a preorder. I'm waiting to see what AMD has to offer first. I'm not dismissing AMD, but I am pessimistic over their last couple of generations of GPUs. If anyone has any reason to boast right now, it's AMD. Nvidia has shown their cards already, and the only way to win back some market share, would be to let the potential customers know about what AMD has to offer, otherwise they are wasting time and possibly losing potential customers. They should be shouting from the rooftops about their performance, since they have almost became irrelevant when it comes to high-end or enthusiasts GPUs.
