efaardvark Posted November 1, 2020 Share Posted November 1, 2020 (edited) Looking at the specs for the just-announced AMD GPUs and I'm just not feeling it. People are thrilled that the top AMD card is competitive with the top nV card at $500 cheaper. Sorry, $1k for a GFX card is still a non-starter. Is it just me? And the new "low end" card is still $600! Somewhere, somehow, things went horribly wrong in the GPU market. My "old" RX480 needs 150 Watts to give me a G3D Mark of 8523. The RX590 takes 175W to give me 9487. That's a 16% power increase for an ~11% performance increase. (And let's not talk about the higher price as well.) Fail. For a while it looked like the new cards were trying. The RX5700 requires even higher power - 180W - but gives a benchmark of 14458. I'd have bought it if the power were equal or less and the prices weren't almost double what I paid for my RX480. It is the same story on the nvidia side, just with slightly different numbers. The "mid range" rtx 3070 is 220W for a benchmark of 21617 at a price of $600. (Assuming you can find them in stock.) Now the new cards are up in the 300W territory! Not only that but the murketing is obfuscating the true power draw behind terms like TDP or thermal design power. (Though I have to give props to AMD for talking about the TBP, or total board power, of their new GFX cards in Su's presentation. You have to dig several layers down in nvidia's product web sites to find that information on their cards.) The top card out there, nvidia's 3090, is $1500, requires a full 350W, and for all that only benches at 25343. 350W?? $1500?? My 480 is sli-capable. If I'd bought 4 cards for $220 each instead of just the one then I'd have spent "only" $900 for a benchmark of around 34,000 and a power requirement of 600W.. a "solution" only slightly more ridiculous than what I'm seeing the industry offer me today. This is electronics we're talking about here. Where's the better-performing option at a cheaper price? Just give me a board that costs less than $200, requires 100W or less, and benches at better than my old RX480. For discussion's sake let's shoot for double the benchmark, or around 18000. This is nearly 5 years after my RX480 was released (June, 2016) after all. They ought to be able to manage that much at least but if you search a GPU database that card simply does not exist. In my mind a GTX1660 or a RX580 from 2 or 3 years ago is still the better buy. edit: seems like most of the gaming world thinks the same, at least according to Steam. Steam's hardware survey page shows the top GPU slots still mainly occupied by nvidia 10-series and AMD RX500-series boards. The top slot is the GTX1060 with 10.37% of Steam users using it. After that there's the 1050ti, the 1050, 1070, and 1650. Then there's the first 20-series board, the 2060, at 2.9% of users. The %age of Steam gamers using things like the RX5700 or the 2080Ti - combined - is in the single digits. Too early to see anything like nvidia's 30-series in the list and AMD's RX6900 won't even be available for a few more weeks yet but I think it will be quite a while before very many gamers are using those either. Edited November 1, 2020 by efaardvark 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!Register a new account
Already have an account? Sign in here.Sign In Now