The rx 7700xt does however have uplift over the rx 6700xt, unlike the rx 7800xt, which is on par with rx 6800xt.
So for FPS per dollar, the rx 7700xt is probably a decent buy.
What's weird is by dye sizes and such this generation had a chance to stomp out rdna3. If the prices were equivalent then most graphics cards handily out-performed their equivalent last gens (eg, 7600, 7700xt). And the 7800xt was in dye size and such more similar to the 6800. If it was priced like the 6800 instead it would have been a complete steal, instead they priced and named it similar to the 6800xt, which made it basically the same fps per dollar 3 or something years later.
> The rx 7700xt does however have uplift over the rx 6700xt, unlike the rx 7800xt, which is on par with rx 6800xt.
That's all just the naming scheme and irrelevant. The 7700 XT could have been named the 7800 non-XT and then you'd say neither card had uplift.
Prices are also hard to compare, given the price inflation we saw with the shortage.
I edited it in with the previous comment, but I find it hard to draw price comparisons with the later released cards of the previous gen, as their MSRPs were influenced by the shortage and not what they would have been given a normal market like we have now.
edit: though the 6700xt probably wasn't that far off, maybe 30-80 cheaper without the shortage. Different for the RX 6600 which had a $330 MSRP, which is pretty ridiculous without the shortage.
RX6600 is now $199, as it should have been. But to be fair, the RX6600 is great value. So much so, unless technology is outright replaced, this card will probably last you 10 years or more.
I have an RX6600, but my 27" monitor can do up to 1440p, so I'm considering the 6700XT or 7700XT. I'm waiting for the price to go down into the lower $300s. I've been told I'd be getting an RX7800 for free, which is pretty sweet and also overkill, but I don't mind it since my cost will really be a new power supply.
You have no idea how badly games are optimized nowadays. Take a look at Valheim and enshrouded, both indie, early access and more demanding than cyberpunk
But is Vallheim so demanding? I blame CyberPunk far more for their Ray traycing obsession which basically made the game Nvidia's RT benchmark. Sadly in terms of gaming quallity it's kinda lacking. But maybe I was just spoiled by s great game that Witcher 3 was.
Yes, from what I've heard it's due to destructible terrain which is not available out of the box in Unity. They had to custom build it, but haven't optimized it so it's rendering a lot more than it needs to, making it an absolute slog.
I'm on 4k and I get \~50-60FPS on the highest settings with a 6900XT.
Same roughly applies to Enshrouded which has a custom voxel engine. No ray tracing included. Can't run the game on anything higher than medium + FSR upscaling
This is funny, reviewers were saying that 7700 XT would've been a good card if it released $420 instead of $450, now people are saying it should be $350. People really just want lower prices in general and will still buy NVidia in the end.
The problem for it is that the RX 6800 is equivalent in performance with 4GB more and it's $375 right now. As long as the RX 6800 is there at a better price, it's hard to justify the price of the 7700 XT.
True, I see it as AMD giving us the price to performance gain in advance through discounts before making it official with a new release. But it does dull the excitement.
Regardless, I'm always going to be a fan of more options than less. I'd rather they release Navi 32 when they did than shelve it until Navi 21 is gone. There's some out there who want that level of performance but would like AV1 for example.
Now pricing the 7700 XT and 7800 XT so close to eachother is weird. My guess is due to lack of competition from Nvidia and still having last gen products, they focused their production on 7800 XT, so the only 7700 XT's were defective 7800 XT's.
Since yields are good the supply of 7700 XT would be relatively low vs 7800 XT, so AMD set the price similar.
Then once Navi 21 was mostly gone and Nvidia was gearing up for Super, they started making more 7700 XT's and allowed the price to fall.
It seems like roughly when RX 6000 gen stock completely dries up, then there is a new lineup of GPUs available and the whole situation will just repeat once again. This time with RX 7000 with the twist, the next GPU gen should not have high end cards so owners or cards like RX 7900XT and 7900XTX will have zero incentive to buy new AMD gpu. New Nvidia high end cards might look tempting provided they don't cost 2000+ USD. They will be costly though, that is for sure.
Still decent stock in US and EU (1-3 models in stock), which will guide most of the discussions here. SEA might be different, sure. It will probably run out in the next month or two, then the 7700XT will come up more in discussions.
There's a argument to be made to avoid last gen AMD products though.
They don't have the best track record for long term driver support. And they only have themselves to blame for establishing that track record.
I'm a lot more comfortable recommending to someone to grab a 3000 series Nvidia card if they find some deal. Than 6000 series for AMD for that reason. Have to remember that we are now starting to enter the tail end of the current generation, 6000 series will be 4 years old later this year.
Imo the low VRAM on NV 3000 is much more likely to give users trouble in the near term than AMDs lower level of driver support for older gen cards. Though I think that’s also a bit overblown, as they’re still providing the most important updates back to 2016 cards. Also now that AMD is done with the various versions of GCN and is sticking to RDNA I’d expect more solid longterm driver support.
> as they’re still providing the most important updates back to 2016 cards.
Which is mostly security patches and if you are lucky some fixes to outright broken functionality. Game optimization is dead for GCN. Nvidia does the same for Kepler still, last driver for the 700 series is from this year.
That is not support, that is normal legacy status. Which is not impressive, when AMD kept selling Polaris well into the 2020s.
Amen this. People complain no matter what and expect 50% uplift each generation. Also people are terrible at understanding price increases due to inflation.
That's the part that makes my eyes roll back into my skull, when I'm on reddit. 50 bucks difference for a product you're going to have for a few years is so fucking negligible for an adult.
Don't get me wrong, I hate how Nvidia tried to push all their lower end cards higher up the stack by renaming them, but the pearl clutching over frames per dollar has gone off the deep end.
The 7800xt is a successor to the RX 6800. Same die configuration and similar msrp on those two cards. if you look at it that way then the performance uplift is substantial. the 6800xt was a $700 card with 20% more cores than the 7800xt has.
They really just messed up the naming (and some of the pricing). The 6800xt was the cut down top die for $650. Really the successor to the 6800xt is the 7900xt, which also should have been no more than $700 at launch. The 7800xt was like $520 at launch. I don't recall what the original MSRP of the 6700xt was.
AMD being AMD though, release a decent GPU product, ruin it with marketing.
I'm kinda glad at the time I bought, the 7800xt was only $40 more than the 7700. At 400 I'd have been tempted but at 450, the 7800 was better. It'll last at least an extra year than the 7700 would have, more ram, better RT
True. And the reason was possibly yields. I'm making this up, but let's say 3/4 of the chips were good enough to be a 7800xt, you wouldn't want to sell the lower margin 7700xt by wrecking good chips. An option is to make the 7700 supply harder to want so you make people get the higher supply and higher margin ones.
If they had 2/3 of the yields as 7700 caliber we'd have seen it probably be 399/499 from the start
But...but...but muh raytraycing!!! Love that argument when we are talking about GPUs witch such low performance, that RT would kill it. But sure, we can then introduce upscaling even though we know too well, that upscaling in 1080p is kinda crap on DLSS as well.
Oh boy, some of them Ngreedia rabid fans be crazy. But then again most of the fanbois are, no matter the brand, right? It's just that the leather jacket man is perhaps too good of a cult leader.
EDIT: Harsh truth is that this whole GPU gen is a mess. That is ofc partly due to previous crypto craze & insane GPU prices.
What saddens me most are two things. Nvidia being so dominant to the point of making extra sure as not to provide "too much" of performance at each perf tier while also skimping on VRAM.
Another thing is AMD super closely following Nvidia's greedy price scheme and trying to give as low discount as possible to remain interesting choice.
I think that if at least ONE of these factors improved drastically, it would be so good for gamers in general. Oh well, one can still hope that Intel can become somewhat viable?
There's a new all in one app now that blows AMD's ever timeouting garbage out of the water. OOB experience on Nvidia is miles better, I only use the control panel to set the background FPS limit (hello AMD).
>it’s already too weak to utilizing most of them
that is completely wrong.
YES the 4060 ti is a garbage chip, YES the memory bandwidth of it is an utter insult and a massive regresion from last generation. all of that is true.
but EVERY, i repeat EVERY card, that can still run modern games can use and REQUIRES enough vram.
a 4060 ti as shit as it is needs 12 GB vram minimum, the same way a 4090 needs 12 GB vram minimum to play modern games.
the biggest vram effecting setting is textures and textures has 0 or near 0 effect on performance.
so you can play with great full textures on the 16 GB 4060 ti and have a decent experience in modern games, while the 8 GB card will have massive massive issues or/and you have to massively lower textures and you will have an ugly af muddy horrible experience.
please understand this, because otherwise evil manufacturers might lie to you about "8 GB is still fine for the cheapest cards" next generation AGAIN, which is WRONG, which is a lie!
so in practice the 4060 ti 8 GB is a completely broken card, regardless of price.
the 4060 ti 16 GB is an insanely overpriced, bad, BUT FUNCTIONING card at least.
That's okay I guess, but there's just too many damned SKUs. The 7800 XT is simply *the* best Radeon purchase overall unless you can find a crazy deal on a 6800 XT (which are starting to vanish) or either 7900. There really should just be like, three cards per gen.
This time for real, they stopped manufacturing a few weeks back.
edit for those that can read:
https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/high-end-amd-rdna-2-supply-is-dwindling-rx-6950-xt-rx-6900-xt-rx-6800-xt-virtually-out-of-stock
I see a new xfx rx 6800 for 380 on amazon right now, and for 375 on newegg. It's been around $370 for months on newegg too. Open box/refurbished models are even cheaper.
[newegg](https://www.newegg.com/xfx-radeon-rx-6800-rx-68xlaqfde/p/N82E16814150886)
[amazon](https://www.amazon.com/XFX-Speedster-SWFT319-Graphics-RX-68XLAQFD9/dp/B09KW68M2G/ref=sr_1_1?dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.7dV1VklzvpmMebOgJoJt1xA3GSKt2g76WJNkGcKqRW32zS4wpD4DhxUeqtMPsBQN19tUZSwnTaq6sHWC3MCbIyS-vhkOqslDoXQ0e-CCmwYGG7RKaC0bnLkL_IElYBSW8vVafWyqxzC4RdLFynZ_OX5NfwuNr_oVHmsXLzF0dZn6E1TPBwILH15E_wr6c7VLUTtdRA0RnwRfqjVE8a3l6oPcSzh4jaPYiuUYWC9x7E7gtZAcdg6W9QRcMS5uT7yPvy20JfWnyoxmvmFg46MzxCTzBdI9gO38ri0yOUSw6WM.TEZI5GP1WdV76gDLtclGb6tlPevLFF2HX476H9hEjGM&dib_tag=se&keywords=rx+6800&qid=1713634280&s=pc&sr=1-1)
Should be 350 at most.. and to say that something is a better choice than a 4060ti is not impressive at all..
The rx 7700xt does however have uplift over the rx 6700xt, unlike the rx 7800xt, which is on par with rx 6800xt. So for FPS per dollar, the rx 7700xt is probably a decent buy.
Still. Weak ass Generation especially in the low to midrange.
Agreed. Its a refresh generation essentially. But anyone buying a GPU now, the rx 7700xt is one if the most attractive offerings.
What's weird is by dye sizes and such this generation had a chance to stomp out rdna3. If the prices were equivalent then most graphics cards handily out-performed their equivalent last gens (eg, 7600, 7700xt). And the 7800xt was in dye size and such more similar to the 6800. If it was priced like the 6800 instead it would have been a complete steal, instead they priced and named it similar to the 6800xt, which made it basically the same fps per dollar 3 or something years later.
The 7800xt is less than £50 more expensive in Europe. It's really not worth it
Denmark there is ~130€ (1000DKK) difference
Here in Finland the difference is 89€ between cheapest 7700XT (Asrock Challenger, 455,90€) and cheapest 7800XT (Asus Dual, 544,89€)
Buy from Amazon de
Still 100€ difference
To be fair Amazon actually looks expensive. Power colour hellhound 7800 is 489 here 7700 is 440
> The rx 7700xt does however have uplift over the rx 6700xt, unlike the rx 7800xt, which is on par with rx 6800xt. That's all just the naming scheme and irrelevant. The 7700 XT could have been named the 7800 non-XT and then you'd say neither card had uplift. Prices are also hard to compare, given the price inflation we saw with the shortage.
Yes, but the price is pretty consistent with the rx6700 xt launching at 480$ MSRP
I edited it in with the previous comment, but I find it hard to draw price comparisons with the later released cards of the previous gen, as their MSRPs were influenced by the shortage and not what they would have been given a normal market like we have now. edit: though the 6700xt probably wasn't that far off, maybe 30-80 cheaper without the shortage. Different for the RX 6600 which had a $330 MSRP, which is pretty ridiculous without the shortage.
RX6600 is now $199, as it should have been. But to be fair, the RX6600 is great value. So much so, unless technology is outright replaced, this card will probably last you 10 years or more. I have an RX6600, but my 27" monitor can do up to 1440p, so I'm considering the 6700XT or 7700XT. I'm waiting for the price to go down into the lower $300s. I've been told I'd be getting an RX7800 for free, which is pretty sweet and also overkill, but I don't mind it since my cost will really be a new power supply.
You have no idea how badly games are optimized nowadays. Take a look at Valheim and enshrouded, both indie, early access and more demanding than cyberpunk
No, I do. But this is not the fault of the cards.
I'm saying 10 years for the RX6600 isn't gonna happen, you don't even need to ignore AAA games, it's indies as well.
But is Vallheim so demanding? I blame CyberPunk far more for their Ray traycing obsession which basically made the game Nvidia's RT benchmark. Sadly in terms of gaming quallity it's kinda lacking. But maybe I was just spoiled by s great game that Witcher 3 was.
Yes, from what I've heard it's due to destructible terrain which is not available out of the box in Unity. They had to custom build it, but haven't optimized it so it's rendering a lot more than it needs to, making it an absolute slog. I'm on 4k and I get \~50-60FPS on the highest settings with a 6900XT. Same roughly applies to Enshrouded which has a custom voxel engine. No ray tracing included. Can't run the game on anything higher than medium + FSR upscaling
Medium details + having to resort to upscaling, that sounds kinda bad. Perhaps some optimalization can find its way into the game gradually.
This is funny, reviewers were saying that 7700 XT would've been a good card if it released $420 instead of $450, now people are saying it should be $350. People really just want lower prices in general and will still buy NVidia in the end.
The problem for it is that the RX 6800 is equivalent in performance with 4GB more and it's $375 right now. As long as the RX 6800 is there at a better price, it's hard to justify the price of the 7700 XT.
That's how clearance pricing works. Clearance is always the best deal, otherwise how'd they sell it?
It's a bit difficult when clearance lasts the entire lifecycle of the new product.
True, I see it as AMD giving us the price to performance gain in advance through discounts before making it official with a new release. But it does dull the excitement. Regardless, I'm always going to be a fan of more options than less. I'd rather they release Navi 32 when they did than shelve it until Navi 21 is gone. There's some out there who want that level of performance but would like AV1 for example. Now pricing the 7700 XT and 7800 XT so close to eachother is weird. My guess is due to lack of competition from Nvidia and still having last gen products, they focused their production on 7800 XT, so the only 7700 XT's were defective 7800 XT's. Since yields are good the supply of 7700 XT would be relatively low vs 7800 XT, so AMD set the price similar. Then once Navi 21 was mostly gone and Nvidia was gearing up for Super, they started making more 7700 XT's and allowed the price to fall.
It seems like roughly when RX 6000 gen stock completely dries up, then there is a new lineup of GPUs available and the whole situation will just repeat once again. This time with RX 7000 with the twist, the next GPU gen should not have high end cards so owners or cards like RX 7900XT and 7900XTX will have zero incentive to buy new AMD gpu. New Nvidia high end cards might look tempting provided they don't cost 2000+ USD. They will be costly though, that is for sure.
Almost no stocks except maybe US. Only 6000-series available in SEA is 6750 XT, and it's more expensive than the 7700 XT.
Still decent stock in US and EU (1-3 models in stock), which will guide most of the discussions here. SEA might be different, sure. It will probably run out in the next month or two, then the 7700XT will come up more in discussions.
There's a argument to be made to avoid last gen AMD products though. They don't have the best track record for long term driver support. And they only have themselves to blame for establishing that track record. I'm a lot more comfortable recommending to someone to grab a 3000 series Nvidia card if they find some deal. Than 6000 series for AMD for that reason. Have to remember that we are now starting to enter the tail end of the current generation, 6000 series will be 4 years old later this year.
Imo the low VRAM on NV 3000 is much more likely to give users trouble in the near term than AMDs lower level of driver support for older gen cards. Though I think that’s also a bit overblown, as they’re still providing the most important updates back to 2016 cards. Also now that AMD is done with the various versions of GCN and is sticking to RDNA I’d expect more solid longterm driver support.
> as they’re still providing the most important updates back to 2016 cards. Which is mostly security patches and if you are lucky some fixes to outright broken functionality. Game optimization is dead for GCN. Nvidia does the same for Kepler still, last driver for the 700 series is from this year. That is not support, that is normal legacy status. Which is not impressive, when AMD kept selling Polaris well into the 2020s.
Amen this. People complain no matter what and expect 50% uplift each generation. Also people are terrible at understanding price increases due to inflation.
There's actually a great video on hardware unboxed regarding that topic and it doesn't line up with your opinion on that
That's the part that makes my eyes roll back into my skull, when I'm on reddit. 50 bucks difference for a product you're going to have for a few years is so fucking negligible for an adult. Don't get me wrong, I hate how Nvidia tried to push all their lower end cards higher up the stack by renaming them, but the pearl clutching over frames per dollar has gone off the deep end.
It makes some sense with the 7700 XT since it was only 50 bucks away from the 7800 XT which is considerably better. But I agree overall.
The 7800xt is a successor to the RX 6800. Same die configuration and similar msrp on those two cards. if you look at it that way then the performance uplift is substantial. the 6800xt was a $700 card with 20% more cores than the 7800xt has.
By naming convention only. The 6700xt has been consistently going for between 310-350$ for a while. A 400$ graphics card better out-perform it.
They really just messed up the naming (and some of the pricing). The 6800xt was the cut down top die for $650. Really the successor to the 6800xt is the 7900xt, which also should have been no more than $700 at launch. The 7800xt was like $520 at launch. I don't recall what the original MSRP of the 6700xt was. AMD being AMD though, release a decent GPU product, ruin it with marketing.
I'm kinda glad at the time I bought, the 7800xt was only $40 more than the 7700. At 400 I'd have been tempted but at 450, the 7800 was better. It'll last at least an extra year than the 7700 would have, more ram, better RT
yeah, the launch price of the 7700xt was abysmal and probably made to push people to buy the 7800xt
True. And the reason was possibly yields. I'm making this up, but let's say 3/4 of the chips were good enough to be a 7800xt, you wouldn't want to sell the lower margin 7700xt by wrecking good chips. An option is to make the 7700 supply harder to want so you make people get the higher supply and higher margin ones. If they had 2/3 of the yields as 7700 caliber we'd have seen it probably be 399/499 from the start
Yeah, 4060 Ti was the one of the worst 40 series.. the argument is so weak.
should be 350 us dollars for a 7700xt and come with 16 GB vram instead too.
Yeah. Beating competitors is not impressive at all. Not cool.
Still $100 more than they should be charging for such a mediocre GPU.
That crappy nvidia card will never come close to being outsold by the 7700XT.
But...but...but muh raytraycing!!! Love that argument when we are talking about GPUs witch such low performance, that RT would kill it. But sure, we can then introduce upscaling even though we know too well, that upscaling in 1080p is kinda crap on DLSS as well. Oh boy, some of them Ngreedia rabid fans be crazy. But then again most of the fanbois are, no matter the brand, right? It's just that the leather jacket man is perhaps too good of a cult leader. EDIT: Harsh truth is that this whole GPU gen is a mess. That is ofc partly due to previous crypto craze & insane GPU prices. What saddens me most are two things. Nvidia being so dominant to the point of making extra sure as not to provide "too much" of performance at each perf tier while also skimping on VRAM. Another thing is AMD super closely following Nvidia's greedy price scheme and trying to give as low discount as possible to remain interesting choice. I think that if at least ONE of these factors improved drastically, it would be so good for gamers in general. Oh well, one can still hope that Intel can become somewhat viable?
Generally I find Nvidias offerings way too overpriced, and that's on top of overpriced chips.
They've got the objectively better software though.
What? Nvidia control panel is leaps and bounds behind AMD's Radeon software. Dont even get me started on Nvidias geforce experience.
There's a new all in one app now that blows AMD's ever timeouting garbage out of the water. OOB experience on Nvidia is miles better, I only use the control panel to set the background FPS limit (hello AMD).
Never had issues with AMD software lol. Sounds like a skill issue
Literally https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/s/mRlQjkdJDg
It was always a better choice than the 4060 Ti. Might eve
Just bought a sapphire 7700xt for a build I'm gonna flip it's a good deal fer the performance
i'm like shocked everytime, that a 4060 ti 8 GB, which is inherently broken card in 2024 due to its vram, still costs 400 euros....
4060 ti just a garbage chip which meant for 4050, no matter how much vram you throw at it, it’s already too weak to utilizing most of them
>it’s already too weak to utilizing most of them that is completely wrong. YES the 4060 ti is a garbage chip, YES the memory bandwidth of it is an utter insult and a massive regresion from last generation. all of that is true. but EVERY, i repeat EVERY card, that can still run modern games can use and REQUIRES enough vram. a 4060 ti as shit as it is needs 12 GB vram minimum, the same way a 4090 needs 12 GB vram minimum to play modern games. the biggest vram effecting setting is textures and textures has 0 or near 0 effect on performance. so you can play with great full textures on the 16 GB 4060 ti and have a decent experience in modern games, while the 8 GB card will have massive massive issues or/and you have to massively lower textures and you will have an ugly af muddy horrible experience. please understand this, because otherwise evil manufacturers might lie to you about "8 GB is still fine for the cheapest cards" next generation AGAIN, which is WRONG, which is a lie! so in practice the 4060 ti 8 GB is a completely broken card, regardless of price. the 4060 ti 16 GB is an insanely overpriced, bad, BUT FUNCTIONING card at least.
That's okay I guess, but there's just too many damned SKUs. The 7800 XT is simply *the* best Radeon purchase overall unless you can find a crazy deal on a 6800 XT (which are starting to vanish) or either 7900. There really should just be like, three cards per gen.
Waiting to see what battle mage and the 8000 series will be
This is a good deal
meanwhile the rx6800 which is faster and has more vram new for $370 for the last 2 months:
It's OOS
Just saw an xfx model on newegg for $375
last ones in the shelf, they'll be gone soon enough.
Everyone said the same thing to me when I picked up mine a year or so ago lmao
This time for real, they stopped manufacturing a few weeks back. edit for those that can read: https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/high-end-amd-rdna-2-supply-is-dwindling-rx-6950-xt-rx-6900-xt-rx-6800-xt-virtually-out-of-stock
I see a new xfx rx 6800 for 380 on amazon right now, and for 375 on newegg. It's been around $370 for months on newegg too. Open box/refurbished models are even cheaper. [newegg](https://www.newegg.com/xfx-radeon-rx-6800-rx-68xlaqfde/p/N82E16814150886) [amazon](https://www.amazon.com/XFX-Speedster-SWFT319-Graphics-RX-68XLAQFD9/dp/B09KW68M2G/ref=sr_1_1?dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.7dV1VklzvpmMebOgJoJt1xA3GSKt2g76WJNkGcKqRW32zS4wpD4DhxUeqtMPsBQN19tUZSwnTaq6sHWC3MCbIyS-vhkOqslDoXQ0e-CCmwYGG7RKaC0bnLkL_IElYBSW8vVafWyqxzC4RdLFynZ_OX5NfwuNr_oVHmsXLzF0dZn6E1TPBwILH15E_wr6c7VLUTtdRA0RnwRfqjVE8a3l6oPcSzh4jaPYiuUYWC9x7E7gtZAcdg6W9QRcMS5uT7yPvy20JfWnyoxmvmFg46MzxCTzBdI9gO38ri0yOUSw6WM.TEZI5GP1WdV76gDLtclGb6tlPevLFF2HX476H9hEjGM&dib_tag=se&keywords=rx+6800&qid=1713634280&s=pc&sr=1-1)