Radeon Series RX 6700 XT preview & analysis
Corsair MM700 & Corsair Katar Pro XT Review
Guru3D Rig of the Month - February 2021
ASUS GeForce RTX 3060 STRIX Gaming OC review
EVGA GeForce RTX 3060 XC Gaming review
MSI GeForce RTX 3060 Gaming X TRIO review
PALIT GeForce RTX 3060 DUAL OC review
ZOTAC GeForce RTX 3060 AMP WHITE review
Fractal Design Meshify 2 Compact chassis review
Sabrent Rocket 4 PLUS 2TB NVMe SSD review
ASUS Radeon RX 6900 XT STRIX OC LC Review
Posted by: on: 01/08/2021 11:58 AM [
32 comment(s) ]
Anyone in for some WAG (Wet Ass GPU)? ASUS just submitted their Radeon RX 6900 XT graphics card for review, and much like the 6800 XT this one shows a bit more TLC as it has been fitted with hybrid cooling. Liquid cooling is being applied on the primary GPU area, and then a fan can cool down some of the additional components. The end result is a graphics card that is kept nicely moist and cool, in an effort to give you silence and stamina.
Read article
Advertisement
pages 1 2 3 4 > »
Cooe
Member
Posts: 38
Member
Posts: 38
Posted on: 01/08/2021 05:21 PM
Uhhh wat??? o_O. Can you just not read, or are you so bad at math you can't compare two numbers & tell which is bigger?
At 1080p & 1440p the AIB RX 6900 XT is more often than not just as fast OR the outright faster card vs the RTX 3090 Founder's Edition (aka both are factory OC'd).
For a 1440p @ 144/240Hz gamer in particular (as well as any SUPER serious competitive 1080p/360Hz players), the RX 6900 XT is more often than not, the fastest raw rasterization GPU around. ESPECIALLY in the most modern titles/engines (where the difference can sometimes be stark, suggesting VERY good things for the "every game also on consoles is optimized for RDNA 2" future).
The only places it notably loses are at >=4K, where a decent little ≈+5-10% perf gap opens up in the 3090's favor, & in current hybrid ray-tracing implementations, where the 6900 XT generally lands in-between a 3070 & 3080 (both of which anyone with half a brain should have expected).
But the RX 6900 XT tying or outright WINNING at the lower resolutions LITERALLY makes your "slower in every way" vs the RTX 3090 claim nothing but a massive pile of bulls**t.
More expensive than a 3090 and slower in every way. Hard Pass.
Uhhh wat??? o_O. Can you just not read, or are you so bad at math you can't compare two numbers & tell which is bigger?
At 1080p & 1440p the AIB RX 6900 XT is more often than not just as fast OR the outright faster card vs the RTX 3090 Founder's Edition (aka both are factory OC'd).
For a 1440p @ 144/240Hz gamer in particular (as well as any SUPER serious competitive 1080p/360Hz players), the RX 6900 XT is more often than not, the fastest raw rasterization GPU around. ESPECIALLY in the most modern titles/engines (where the difference can sometimes be stark, suggesting VERY good things for the "every game also on consoles is optimized for RDNA 2" future).
The only places it notably loses are at >=4K, where a decent little ≈+5-10% perf gap opens up in the 3090's favor, & in current hybrid ray-tracing implementations, where the 6900 XT generally lands in-between a 3070 & 3080 (both of which anyone with half a brain should have expected).
But the RX 6900 XT tying or outright WINNING at the lower resolutions LITERALLY makes your "slower in every way" vs the RTX 3090 claim nothing but a massive pile of bulls**t.
BReal85
Senior Member
Posts: 470
Senior Member
Posts: 470
Posted on: 01/08/2021 05:22 PM
Of course it's slower than the 3090 as the reference 6900 XT is also slower. Just releasing a watercooled card doesn't make it faster if it's slower at reference level, the only difference is when it is 1-2%. The extra cash is for the cooling itself. Need to mention, performance difference is only 6-8% at reference level, so with this ASUS WC, it's only 3-4% from the ref 3090 and you get a superior WC solution. Of course you get a vastly superior RT performance with the 3090, so for $1500, I would definitely take a cheaper air cooled 3090 than a WCd RX 6900XT.
However, at a $1000-1500 price gap, I would go for a 6900XT since I don't care for RT as it's still not present in enough games and in enough quality to justify the performance loss, plus DLSS 2.0 (which gives much better quality than DLSS) is also present in too few titles. And even the 3090 can suffer in RT games where all RT features are present, like Control, where you can only get RT on with enough fps (~70) on 1440p without DLSS. 4K 34ish average fps is lame for a $1500+ card. And I believe most people are not paying $1500 to step back in resolution (with RT I mean). Not to speak of Cyberpunk with 4K RT maxed out and DLSS on @ 40 fps. LOL
Anyway, it would be fair to compare a WCd 3090 with this, which is also $400-500 extra to the MSRP.
More expensive than a 3090 and slower in every way. Hard Pass.
Of course it's slower than the 3090 as the reference 6900 XT is also slower. Just releasing a watercooled card doesn't make it faster if it's slower at reference level, the only difference is when it is 1-2%. The extra cash is for the cooling itself. Need to mention, performance difference is only 6-8% at reference level, so with this ASUS WC, it's only 3-4% from the ref 3090 and you get a superior WC solution. Of course you get a vastly superior RT performance with the 3090, so for $1500, I would definitely take a cheaper air cooled 3090 than a WCd RX 6900XT.
However, at a $1000-1500 price gap, I would go for a 6900XT since I don't care for RT as it's still not present in enough games and in enough quality to justify the performance loss, plus DLSS 2.0 (which gives much better quality than DLSS) is also present in too few titles. And even the 3090 can suffer in RT games where all RT features are present, like Control, where you can only get RT on with enough fps (~70) on 1440p without DLSS. 4K 34ish average fps is lame for a $1500+ card. And I believe most people are not paying $1500 to step back in resolution (with RT I mean). Not to speak of Cyberpunk with 4K RT maxed out and DLSS on @ 40 fps. LOL
Anyway, it would be fair to compare a WCd 3090 with this, which is also $400-500 extra to the MSRP.
Undying
Senior Member
Posts: 14885
Senior Member
Posts: 14885
Posted on: 01/08/2021 05:23 PM
Uhhh wat??? o_O. Can you just not read, or are you so bad at math you can't compare two numbers & tell which is bigger. At 1080p & 1440p it's more often than not just as fast OR the outright faster card. For a 1440p @ 144/240Hz gamer, the RX 6900 XT is more often than not, the fastest raw rasterization GPU around. ESPECIALLY in the most modern titles/engines (where the difference can sometimes be stark, suggesting VERY good things for the "every game also on consoles is optimized for RDNA 2" future). The only places it notably loses is at >=4K & in current ray-tracing implementations (which anyone with half a brain should have expected).
But the RX 6900 XT tying or outright WINNING at the lower resolutions LITERALLY makes your "slower in every way" vs the RTX 3090 claim nothing but a massive pile of bulls**t.
He didnt read the review and commented on it so yeah.
Uhhh wat??? o_O. Can you just not read, or are you so bad at math you can't compare two numbers & tell which is bigger. At 1080p & 1440p it's more often than not just as fast OR the outright faster card. For a 1440p @ 144/240Hz gamer, the RX 6900 XT is more often than not, the fastest raw rasterization GPU around. ESPECIALLY in the most modern titles/engines (where the difference can sometimes be stark, suggesting VERY good things for the "every game also on consoles is optimized for RDNA 2" future). The only places it notably loses is at >=4K & in current ray-tracing implementations (which anyone with half a brain should have expected).
But the RX 6900 XT tying or outright WINNING at the lower resolutions LITERALLY makes your "slower in every way" vs the RTX 3090 claim nothing but a massive pile of bulls**t.
He didnt read the review and commented on it so yeah.
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 13234
Senior Member
Posts: 13234
Posted on: 01/08/2021 05:29 PM
@spine is wrong but this also makes no sense lol
Of course it's slower than the 3090 as the reference 6900 XT is also slower.
@spine is wrong but this also makes no sense lol
pages 1 2 3 4 > »
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 912
Because no company wants to spend money and not make money.