Razer Leviathan V2 gaming soundbar review
Guru3D NVMe Thermal Test - the heatsink vs. performance
EnGenius ECW220S 2x2 Cloud Access Point review
Alphacool Eisbaer Aurora HPE 360 LCS cooler review
Noctua NH-D12L CPU Cooler Review
Silicon Power XPOWER XS70 1TB NVMe SSD Review
Hyte Y60 chassis review
ASUS ROG Thor 1000W Platinum II (1000W PSU) review
ASUS ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000 WIFI6E router review
Backforce One Plus Gaming Chair review
Review: Sapphire Radeon RX 6950 XT Sapphire Nitro+ Pure
Sapphire is also present with a totally new lineup, meet the incredibly impressive Sapphire Radeon RX 6950 XT Sapphire Nitro+ Pure. The factory tweaked product side does deliver when it comes to cooling.
Read the full review here.
Review: Sapphire Radeon RX 6750 XT Nitro+ - 05/10/2022 03:03 PM
Sapphire also offers a nice Radeon RX 6750 XT 12GB, we review the beefed-up Nitro+ edition with proper cooling, low temps, and low acoustics. Well, that and a nice factory tweak as well of course. Rea...
Review: MSI Radeon RX 6950 XT Gaming X TRIO - 05/10/2022 03:03 PM
There's a new AMD flagship in town, the MSI Radeon RX 6950 XT Gaming X TRIO is blazingly fast. As AMD refreshes its rDNA 2 graphics card portfolio with a new family of cards in 2022, this card series...
Review: MSI Radeon RX 6750 XT Gaming X TRIO - 05/10/2022 03:02 PM
We review the MSI Radeon RX 6750 XT Gaming X TRIO. Dressed up like an enthusiast card this 550~600 USD product manages to keep up in performance really well, the card series now comes with 18 Gbps mem...
Review: MSI Radeon RX 6650 XT Gaming X - 05/10/2022 03:02 PM
We review the MSI Radeon RX 6650 XT Gaming X. AMD's RDNA 2 desktop graphics card line, the Radeon RX 6000 series, was released towards the end of 2020. AMD revamps its rDNA 2 graphics card portfolio ...
Review: Deepcool AS500 PLUS CPU Cooler - 05/05/2022 02:05 PM
We review the Deepcool AS500 PLUS. This dual fan-based CPU cooler absolutely impresses in looks, features as well as performance. It's easily tagged as a high-end performing air-cooler with low noise...
Lukart
Member
Posts: 50
Joined: 2014-12-14
Member
Posts: 50
Joined: 2014-12-14
#6016212 Posted on: 05/11/2022 08:13 AM
Could you try getting a OC-Formula from Asrock? That would be a great comparision. OC-Formulas are the highest performing models out there...
Could you try getting a OC-Formula from Asrock? That would be a great comparision. OC-Formulas are the highest performing models out there...
thesebastian
Senior Member
Posts: 164
Joined: 2015-06-06
Senior Member
Posts: 164
Joined: 2015-06-06
#6016286 Posted on: 05/11/2022 01:39 PM
In the review I see a lot of focus in Raytracing benchmarks but in my opinion it would be nice to have both RT on and RT Off.
This is because, who actually plays heavy games like Cyberpunk with RT enabled?
I suppose following groups enable the setting:
- 1080p users --> 83 FPS with a 3090 Ti
But I doubt somebody with higher GPU load would enable it:
- 1440p 144Hz users --> 61 FPS with a 3090 Ti (I assume they dont enable this because of the horrible 1% Low FPS and because they will probably want to have an average of 80-90 fps at least if they are used to play above 60Hz/FPS).
- 2160p users --> 34 FPS with a 3090 Ti, there is no way they use the setting. ( And I wouldn't swap native rendering with DLSS to change shaders lights/reflections with raytracing lights/reflections).
- ultrawide 1440p users
----
RT in AMD is much worse and that should be mentioned in every review. I also have an AMD card, and if I have FPS to spare, I still enable RT. (example: I played following games with RT ON, because they still give +100-120 FPS: Doom Eternal and Warzone).
But it would be nice to have the non RT version as well in the review. At least until enabling RT becomes the norm and most of the players stopped playing without RT. (So, having RT broadly used in the mid-range).
Right now I see RT as a not efficient technology in Nvidia cards and even much less efficient in AMD cards. If it was efficient at least in nvidia, then I'd consider it more seriously.
In the review I see a lot of focus in Raytracing benchmarks but in my opinion it would be nice to have both RT on and RT Off.
This is because, who actually plays heavy games like Cyberpunk with RT enabled?
I suppose following groups enable the setting:
- 1080p users --> 83 FPS with a 3090 Ti
But I doubt somebody with higher GPU load would enable it:
- 1440p 144Hz users --> 61 FPS with a 3090 Ti (I assume they dont enable this because of the horrible 1% Low FPS and because they will probably want to have an average of 80-90 fps at least if they are used to play above 60Hz/FPS).
- 2160p users --> 34 FPS with a 3090 Ti, there is no way they use the setting. ( And I wouldn't swap native rendering with DLSS to change shaders lights/reflections with raytracing lights/reflections).
- ultrawide 1440p users
----
RT in AMD is much worse and that should be mentioned in every review. I also have an AMD card, and if I have FPS to spare, I still enable RT. (example: I played following games with RT ON, because they still give +100-120 FPS: Doom Eternal and Warzone).
But it would be nice to have the non RT version as well in the review. At least until enabling RT becomes the norm and most of the players stopped playing without RT. (So, having RT broadly used in the mid-range).
Right now I see RT as a not efficient technology in Nvidia cards and even much less efficient in AMD cards. If it was efficient at least in nvidia, then I'd consider it more seriously.
Undying
Senior Member
Posts: 18857
Joined: 2008-08-28
Senior Member
Posts: 18857
Joined: 2008-08-28
#6016291 Posted on: 05/11/2022 01:54 PM
In the review I see a lot of focus in Raytracing benchmarks I understand this is probably because the games have high CPU bottleneck and if you don't enable RT you just see a closer gap due to a CPU bottleneck.
But who actually plays heavy games like Cyberpunk with RT enabled?
I suppose following groups enable the setting:
- 1080p users --> 83 FPS with a 3090 Ti
But I doubt somebody with higher GPU load would enable it:
- 1440p 144Hz users --> 61 FPS with a 3090 Ti (I assume they dont enable this because of the horrible 1% Low FPS and because they will probably want to have an average of 80-90 fps at least if they are used to play above 60Hz/FPS).
- 2160p users --> 34 FPS with a 3090 Ti, there is no way they use the setting. ( And I wouldn't swap native rendering with DLSS to change shaders lights/reflections with raytracing lights/reflections).
- ultrawide 1440p users
----
RT in AMD is much worse and that should be mentioned in every review. I also have an AMD card, and if I have FPS to spare, I still enable RT. (example: I played following games with RT ON, because they still give +100-120 FPS: Doom Eternal and Warzone).
But it would be nice to have the non RT version as well in the review. At least until enabling RT becomes the norm and most of the players stopped playing without RT. (So, having RT broadly used in the mid-range).
Right now I see RT as a not efficient technology in Nvidia cards and even much less efficient in AMD cards. If it was efficient at least in nvidia, then I'd consider it more seriously.
Thats where you mistaken. If you enable dlss your framerate will double across all resolutions making rt available for wider range of cards and honestly it looks like native rendering.
In the review I see a lot of focus in Raytracing benchmarks I understand this is probably because the games have high CPU bottleneck and if you don't enable RT you just see a closer gap due to a CPU bottleneck.
But who actually plays heavy games like Cyberpunk with RT enabled?
I suppose following groups enable the setting:
- 1080p users --> 83 FPS with a 3090 Ti
But I doubt somebody with higher GPU load would enable it:
- 1440p 144Hz users --> 61 FPS with a 3090 Ti (I assume they dont enable this because of the horrible 1% Low FPS and because they will probably want to have an average of 80-90 fps at least if they are used to play above 60Hz/FPS).
- 2160p users --> 34 FPS with a 3090 Ti, there is no way they use the setting. ( And I wouldn't swap native rendering with DLSS to change shaders lights/reflections with raytracing lights/reflections).
- ultrawide 1440p users
----
RT in AMD is much worse and that should be mentioned in every review. I also have an AMD card, and if I have FPS to spare, I still enable RT. (example: I played following games with RT ON, because they still give +100-120 FPS: Doom Eternal and Warzone).
But it would be nice to have the non RT version as well in the review. At least until enabling RT becomes the norm and most of the players stopped playing without RT. (So, having RT broadly used in the mid-range).
Right now I see RT as a not efficient technology in Nvidia cards and even much less efficient in AMD cards. If it was efficient at least in nvidia, then I'd consider it more seriously.
Thats where you mistaken. If you enable dlss your framerate will double across all resolutions making rt available for wider range of cards and honestly it looks like native rendering.
Picolete
Senior Member
Posts: 360
Joined: 2014-12-09
Senior Member
Posts: 360
Joined: 2014-12-09
#6016293 Posted on: 05/11/2022 02:04 PM
Could someone explain me, why it got such low scores on these tests?
https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/sapphire-radeon-rx-6950-xt-sapphire-nitro-pure-review,23.html
Could someone explain me, why it got such low scores on these tests?
https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/sapphire-radeon-rx-6950-xt-sapphire-nitro-pure-review,23.html
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Member
Posts: 52
Joined: 2017-09-11
The numbers on the 6950XT look pretty good... but... like others pointed out, with MPT TDP adjustments my AMD 6900XT achieves almost identical scores. I'd like to see a bit of a technical dive into the new GPU stepping's, firmware, memory timings, etc to see what the differences are. Importantly, how well they overclock.
If you held off purchasing a 6900XT during the inflated price period, well your money is certainly going to go further now.