Having buyer's remorse. Am I missing out anything by choosing the AMD route?
Posted by x3pd4@reddit | buildapc | View on Reddit | 372 comments
Got a 7500f + 7800xt pure combo for 1250$ including everything. Price is probably more expensive because of where I live, but is this a decent pickup? Been seeing way too many things about RTX cards instead.
hwertz10@reddit
CUDA. But that's not used for games. I wouldn't have buyers remorse over that, it's a pretty sweet setup!
pmerritt10@reddit
This is my suggestion.... Ignore all the noise here..... Play the games you enjoy playing.... If you like how they play and look.... Does it really matter what brand GPU you have? I have the 7800xt picked it up on launch day.... It's my first AMD ever and I was always Nvidia. I have zero regrets.... Not saying that you will have the same experience all I'm saying is actually give it a few days and see e how you actually enjoy the card for yourself. Again don't worry about everyone else. Worst case is you end up returning it. Best case is you actually enjoy it and save a couple hundred dollars.
soundologist6@reddit
This right here. From a 970 to a 7800XT and I have zero regrets what so ever.
guhardrock@reddit
Same here. Impressed by high and ultra settings on 1440p, on a very good framerate (110-180 fps). No complaints.
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
Enable ray tracing and see if that looks worth paying hundreds of dollars for improved performance
That’s all you miss out on
x3pd4@reddit (OP)
If thats it then im relieved. No DLSS isnt much?
tucketnucket@reddit
DLSS is incredible tech. It's several generations ahead of FSR. Anyone that says otherwise is ignorant or lying.
Screwed_38@reddit
I'm all in on AMD but I do miss Nvidia upscaling, DLSS is incredible, FSR from what I have found makes it look worse for pretty much the same FPS so in my opinion it's not even worth using
shymenJESUS@reddit
Fsr 3.1 is good though.
El_Diablosauce@reddit
Fsr is so limited on the scale it's implemented it's really not even worth it atm. Ghosting & artifacts are still a big thing. I ran a 7800xt for a few days about a week ago. It's on the way back to Amazon & a 4080 super is on the way to replace it. Never going red again for gpus
tucketnucket@reddit
Careful with the "never go red again for GPUs" philosophy. AMD could surprise us in the future. For a long ass time, Intel was the clear winner for PC gaming. AMD just couldn't make a great gaming CPU. Then they decided to innovate. Now look at the CPU industry.
Nvidia has clearly chosen the AI market as their target audience. I mean, it just makes sense. Corporations have deeper pockets than the average gamer. Right now, a great AI card and a great gaming card are pretty synonymous. Could that change in the future? Defintely possible. Going back to the CPU market, look how things changed there. Clock speed was pretty much THE thing to improve for better gaming performance. It also led to an overall faster CPU for every reason. Had it only helped gaming, Intel may not have wasted their time by bumping up those clock speeds. On the other hand, AMD decided to take a different approach for gaming. They realized there was another way to really boost gaming performance at the cost of productive performance. Enter 3D vCache. Now, AMD is pretty damn far ahead of Intel in gaming.
Sorry for the rambling haha. Just pointing out that we never know what innovation could be the next game changer for gaming (pun intended), and what may be the next game changer for AI. What we do know is that AMD is willing to prioritize gamers and Nvidia will full send on the AI market.
El_Diablosauce@reddit
Trust me I was there for the amd fx cpus I get what you mean. It's a relatively straightforward thing that the future isn't set in stone of course, but generally, with the knowledge & tech currently available, nvidia will most likely be the go to for me atleast, in the foreseeable future. I hop between ai mapping & blender quite a bit for things so I just needed something that packs in both fields, if i were going strictly gaming & wasn't really too worried about RT or dlss (ironically, many of the games I play implement neither, lol) id probably say amd isn't the worst direction to look
Creative_Mixture5050@reddit
I tried both, FSR on a 7900xt and DLSS on a 4080. DLSS is a little bit better, but for native is the only way. They are both playable, but I would use them if I cant get 80fps on High settings.
xYeahboiix@reddit
Yep the ghosting/flickering from upscaling is something that just annoys me so much particularly ghosting tho find it so distracting I prefer to just drop settings quality if it's noticeable in any way
Cheese-is-neat@reddit
Yeah I can’t stand using upscalers and frame generation. It always looks off
Creative_Mixture5050@reddit
They are great technologies, but not for me. I mostly play multiplayer games eg. Warzone, CS2, Valorant, LoL which are not to heavy on the GPU, but from time to time I like to play single player games like Cyberpunk 2077 and Wukong where I try to stay native as much as I can.
Cpt_Sandur@reddit
They both piss of native resolution. Seems the same to me 😄
xYeahboiix@reddit
I mean they don't, they are generally thought to be better than running non native resolution tho
drake90001@reddit
You need to enable DSDR, go to a higher resolution, then set DLSS balanced. That gives the algorithm more pixels to worth with.
theblu3j@reddit
So… DLAA but worse if the resulting DLSS resolution is close to native. Or if it’s higher than native, then that’s just supersampling with more steps, which might look a little nicer, but not very worth it for some performance loss. If the resolution is less than native but still more than DLSS balanced without DSDR it’s just DLSS Quality. What the fuck is the point of this.
drake90001@reddit
It does work. I used it when I was running 1080 P also. Enabling DSDR and then setting DLS as to a lower resolution/quality setting to way sharper image and less toll on the GPU.
MiguelitiRNG@reddit
It might make sense because its ai upscaling so having a higher base resolution might just make it perfect
rudimfm@reddit
More pixels?
MenWhoStareAtBoats@reddit
Depends on the game. Some games actually look better in DLSS than native.
tucketnucket@reddit
They defintely can because TAA is trash. I pretty much ALWAYS enable DLSS when it's available. Even when I'm maxing out the refresh rate of my monitor. With the "quality" setting, I genuinely can't see the difference native and DLSS. I use it for the anti-aliasing and to take strain off the GPU. Less strain seems to equal more even frame pacing. Frame pacing is the most important part of a game feeling "smooth" for me. I'd take a smooth 90 fps over a choppy 120 fps. The .1% lows are everything.
MenWhoStareAtBoats@reddit
It varies from game-to-game. Some look better in native; some in DLSS. Some are virtually indistinguishable.
KTTalksTech@reddit
And some games look better with properly tuned TAA than DLSS even when rendering lower than native
Blindfire2@reddit
DLSS (and FSR) is TAA lol. If it doesn't look good with it, then normal TAA doesn't look good for that game anyways.
KTTalksTech@reddit
Fsr maybe. DLSS is AI based. Also you can change the way TAA works, if it looks bad in a game it's usually a very easy fix for the developers.
Blindfire2@reddit
Both DLSS and FSR use TAA for the aliasing.
karmapopsicle@reddit
I think you would get a lot out of reading through this excellent summary posted on r/hardware a few years ago back when DLSS 2.0 was still new and commonly misunderstood.
the very basic tl;dr to what youre saying here is that while DLSS does at its core use the TAA framework, the genesis of DLSS 2.0’s existence is to leverage deep learning and the dedicated ML-acceleration hardware on Nvidia’s cards to mitigate all of the visual artifacts that are well known side effects of using TAA.
That’s why FSR2/3 still suffer many of those same artifacts such as shimmering, image instability, ghosting, etc in situations where DLSS does not.
AMD has thankfully confirmed recently that the FSR team has been tasked with developing an ML-based upscaler of their own since the beginning of this year (if I remember the rough time estimates correctly). I suspect it may be limited to RDNA 4 products though.
KTTalksTech@reddit
That sounded wrong, so I tried to confirm it online and couldn't. Closest info I found is that sometimes games with DLSS 2 or older would optionally run TAA on the image before upscaling
Blindfire2@reddit
Hmm ill look it up after work but that was part of what I saw that told me the upscaling techs all use taa after the picture is reconstructed
HigginsBUTTS@reddit
I just looked it up and DLSS doesn't use TAA but it uses similar techniques, however, TAA samples every frames pixels but DLSS doesn't.
I get the confusion though because honestly that took me a few reads on different sources.
KTTalksTech@reddit
Yeah I saw that too
Blindfire2@reddit
Can you link it to me so I can read later? I don't want to throw out the same wrong info if I'm mistaken
HigginsBUTTS@reddit
I will caution you it's a bit of a headache to read, I feel like the writer could've simplified some parts but they definitely over explained a few things and it made me go back a few times because I felt like I missed something.
namelessted@reddit
TAA isn't any one thing, it just means "temporal anti-aliasing". There are a ton of different ways to implement TAA. Some studios rely on TAA tools that are built into the engine they are using, some build their own solution, or some use solutions from GPU vendors like FSR, DLSS, or XESS.
All TAA really means is that the game is using some amount of information from a previous frame and the current frame that results in a reduction of aliasing in the presented image.
It isn't that DLSS uses TAA or not, it IS TAA.
Lowback@reddit
TAA is smeary ass juice. Black smudges and white halos interrupting shadows thanks to any movement. Screw that mess.
M1ghty_boy@reddit
Halo infinite has absolutely shite TAA and heavy sharpening to cover it up, it’s a shame it probably can’t be injected because it uses easy anticheat
KTTalksTech@reddit
Can't you at least disable it though the game's cfg? Forcing an alternate AA method through the drivers normally shouldn't trigger the anti cheat
Maysock@reddit
Name one. That doesn't make sense to me.
MenWhoStareAtBoats@reddit
For the lazy:
https://www.techspot.com/article/2803-dlss-vs-native-1080p/
Mygaffer@reddit
Which are these games that supposedly look better being upscaled rather than being rendered at your monitor's native resolution? Names please.
namelessted@reddit
I think one of the major issues is that so many games "native" rendering has TAA forced on. In those games, you are comparing the engines native TAA to DLSS, and many times DLSS will look better.
Some of those games you can change .ini settings to force TAA off, and most of the time the image looks absolutely horrendous. This is because the rendering is designed to assume TAA is happening and the way the image is presented without TAA makes it look extremely jagged and a lot of visuals just look completely broken. It is kind of like the idea of older games looking better on a CRT than on a 4K LCD because the way the art was designed you aren't supposed to see sharp individual pixels, you are supposed to see the effect of interlacing and blurring that a CRT introduces into the image.
But, of course, there are still games that actual run at real native resolutions that do still look better than DLSS or any other upscaling technique.
MenWhoStareAtBoats@reddit
Go look for one of the latest TechSpot in-depth article on upscaling technologies. It sounds like you and El_Diablosauce could learn a lot there.
El_Diablosauce@reddit
They can't, they just make claims that sound like they could be right & hope people are too lazy or inefficient at fact checking
Theofilos__Dimas@reddit
The only cards that you can use DLSS on are from the 4070 and upwards. What is the point of paying so much money for a card to use an upscaler?? Yes, we know that DLSS is lightyears ahead of FSR, but does it really matter enough?
Stalbjorn@reddit
This is not true. For example my 3080 can utilize DLSS.
Theofilos__Dimas@reddit
I am referring to cards that you can buy new
namelessted@reddit
DLSS is supported on all current nVidia cards, not just 4070 and up. RTX 3050 would be the entry point.
Stalbjorn@reddit
Understood.
El_Diablosauce@reddit
Man I've seen some pretty bad hot takes but this takes the cake
neonas123@reddit
No all gives crap about shitty performance hitting ray tracing. DLSS only is thing to make ray tracing crap look better in games
Imoraswut@reddit
It's better, but "several generations" is complete nonsense and it makes the following sentence more applicable to your own comment than anyone else
Commercial-Nebula-50@reddit
Id say 1 generation ahead.
systemBuilder22@reddit
0.5 generations ahead of FSR 3.1. And NVidia frame generation is BEHIND AMD FMF, SO lets call it even!
systemBuilder22@reddit
FSR 3.1 works just fine! NVidians spend more time playing with their settings on their super weak cards, than they spend playing games!
jahermitt@reddit
It depends on what your doing. Steam survey still has something between 60-70% of players at 1080p. DLSS is definitely great, but isn't a requirement for most.
tucketnucket@reddit
I'm not making any argument to the value proposition or necessity of DLSS.
I just saw OP say "No DLSS isn't much?"
I felt like they were being misinformed if that was their takeaway. OP should defintely look up comparisons between FSR and DLSS. They should assess whether an upscaler will be important to them based on the types of games they play, the settings they play at, the resolution they play at, and their monitor's capabilites. Based on the way optimization is headed for PC gaming, it seems like upscaling is going to become a standard eventually for the more demanding games. That's very important to keep in mind. Brushing off the idea that upscaling is a gimmick, or otherwise not important could lead to buyer's remorse. And that's exactly what OP was trying to avoid by making their post.
jahermitt@reddit
I hear ya, I wasn't trying to infer that it was a gimmick just that it wasn't for everyone.
Also I think the direction for relying on up-scaling is sad and hope there will be some pull against it.
Gabochuky@reddit
You probably only watch Digital Foundry were they have to zoom 100x to show any substantial difference. In real world performance they look very similar.
tucketnucket@reddit
If you have an Nvidia card, you can just...test the difference. DLSS looks and feels better. The newest FSR I've tried feels more like DLSS 2 to me. It's not bad, but it's simply a couple generations behind the latest DLSS. Like it or not, upscaling is becoming a requirement for the cinematic AAA games. If you're into those games, you WILL need upscaling eventually. So upscaling isn't something to be shrugged off. To make an informed buying decision, OP will need to determine if upscaling is something they will need. If they don't play the types of games where upscaling is needed (or play at a lower resolution), then upscaling CAN be shrugged off. If they play new, AAA, cinematic games, they need to watch some comparisons between FSR and DLSS.
Letting OP think that DLSS is just a gimmick or something is akin to misinforming them. It also won't lead them into looking into adjacent features like DLAA and DLDSR. This community is meant to help people make informed buying decisions (among other advice). I feel like it's the community's responsibility to help OPs paint the full picture.
Gabochuky@reddit
I never said upsacaling is something to be shrugged off, I don't know where you took that from. DLSS is better most of the times. But not $300 usd more better.
tucketnucket@reddit
I suppose you didn't say that. I've just got the full scope of my original comment in mind. The primary point of my post was to urge OP to not dismiss DLSS. Upscaling is becoming more and more important. Depending on a person's use case, having the best of the best upscaling tech can be much more important than pure raster.
If you're only qualm with my comment was you feel my claim of DLSS being better was exaggerated, my bad. You're probably right.
Banana_Joe85@reddit
The difference is way less than what you make it out to be.
And this is from someone with a Nvidia card, so I can use both (FSR is free, DLSS is proprietary). It highly depends on the game in question as well and how the tech was implemented.
Mygaffer@reddit
Native is superior though....
Putrid-Flan-1289@reddit
Agreed. FSR3 was way overhyped. The only awesome thing we ever got out of FSR over DLSS was the fact that it saved alot of people's GTX 1080's, by oddly being able to be enabled on them in alot of games.
huffalump1@reddit
Yep, and it's not JUST DLSS that you get:
DLDSR - the best super-res scaling algo. Run games at a higher res than your monitor, and you might not even need AA. Runs on any game, app, or even desktop.
DLAA - nice AA. /r/fuckTAA
Frame Gen - personal preference, but I see it as free smoothness!
And, DLSS scaling itself is really good too. FSR is starting to catch up and isn't totally garbage, but for both, it depends on what the title supports!
With a stronger GPU, you aren't relying on DLSS for framerate quite as much, but then you can take advantage of other features (i.e. RTX).
But, AMD cards tend to be better value for more performance! So it's kind of a toss-up, depending on your preference.
deadlybydsgn@reddit
I think this is the most slept-on feature. Some games like Alan Wake 2 look 100% better by using this.
Sturmx@reddit
Yes DLSS is immensely better in my experience. FSR seems to be a couple years back. Not to mention DLAA which looks fantastic. DLDSR and RTX video as well. There is way more than just ray tracing.
Ravere@reddit
There is no way I would use FG on an Nvidia card under 60, the lag is very noticeable.
jackofallcards@reddit
You guys are using WAY too many acronyms
Saneless@reddit
Wdym? IDK, WTF, wgaf
toph1980@reddit
Wtf
CounterSYNK@reddit
I didn’t even realize there were so many acronyms. My brain just automatically translated all of that to their proper names and I didn’t realize until you pointed it out. I think I am terminally PC brained unfortunately.
metagrim@reddit
Totally agree, it feels like molasses, but looks great. I'm in the dark on why FG would be desirable above 60, I thought the whole point was to add more frame data to make it look more like 60fps+. Is there a benefit to running it at higher frame rates?
ScreenwritingJourney@reddit
The benefit is making a game that’s running at 50-60 look like it’s looked at 120+ in my opinion. If I can get a clean 60 without it I’m not going to turn it on and ruin the image with artefacts and blur.
Sturmx@reddit
I disagree and I have a hard time thinking people that say that even have an Nvidia card. Or it's just a placebo in their head.
Thelgow@reddit
I was playing Cyberpunk and I thought, wtf, this looks UGLY all of a sudden. Turns out the update enabled FSR.
EatsOverTheSink@reddit
They’re closing the gap slowly but surely. FSR 3.1 looks pretty damn good. As good as DLSS 3.7? Hell no. But I don’t think 3.7 looks hundreds of dollars better.
Derfel995@reddit
"you guys don't all play with a magnifier 400% mode in a 1/20 piece of the screen"?
ego100trique@reddit
FSR 4 will have same (allegedly) performances as DLSS as it will be using a machine learning model to upscale games as DLSS is doing.
This will surely be available for all 7XXX series (no infos yet but this series is pretty good for AI) so you will be fine overtime compared to a low/mid end NVIDIA card.
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
It’s powerful enough to not need upscaling
You have XeSS available in some games which matches DLSS
FSR highest quality mode looks good enough
Next year should have new version of FSR with deep learning upscaler
SenseiBonsai@reddit
XeSS is nowhere near close to dlss and even behind on frs,
Every year people think fsr is gonna beat dlss, truth is the fsr from now doesnt even match the dlss1.0. When next year fsr 3.2 or 4.0 or whatever they gonna name it comes out then dlss will also have a newer version.
You say his gpu is powerfull enough to not need upscaling, yes at 1080p you dont need it, but at 1440p there are some games you will need it. And at 4k you will need it in a lot of games.
420KillaNA@reddit
you don't NEED upscaling - it depends on display - upscaling is literally only for bringing images "up to 1440/4K" - to make games or whatever look cleaner/sharper on a lower end display - aka rendering at 4K to make a 1080p display "similar to 1440p+" or so... upscaling literally kills FPS unless you value quality over framerates but if not, then don't use it/disable it and framerates will boost a bit
this does depends on display a bit - not gonna get a huge benefit unless it's more of 1080p/1440p and enabling upscaling to 4K+ but you'll have a small drop in FPS - it's not entirely pushing everything in 4K but it is sharpening "a bit over the natural display" and then dropping it back to the native display resolution, but in effect enhances the image considerably at the cost of slightly reduced performance
also some other features may or may not work with certain type(s) of upscaling - like Nvidia's RTX HDR feature does not work with upscaling enabled - and probably some with AMD/Intel GPUs also
SenseiBonsai@reddit
True you dont need it if you think 30/40fps is acceptable. Try running alan wake 2 at 4k on your 7800xt at native 4k no upscaling and than come back to me and tell me if you still stand your point than you dont need upscaling and you think 30fps with random 15fps drops is okay
420KillaNA@reddit
bad settings most likely or need to run DDU and clean install drivers - there ain't no fucking way that image upscaling aka "artificially boosting resolution" from "1440p to 4K" or above "4K to 8K" - is "adding FPS" -- not fucking possible not even close - I'm not sure you understand how it's making the card work twice as hard and you may have other bad settings... what is limiting you to 30 FPS in AW2? on 7800xt? well there is 7900 XTX and 7950? XTX and not sure but you might not have the CPU and limiting FPS - ngl im not sure on the 4K performance on the AMD side
I have an old AMD XFX RX 570 XXX Edition 8gb on a 1080p TV & Nvidia EVGA 3060 XC 12gb on a LG 27" 1440p monitor - but "image upscaling" is rendering images at higher resolution aka boosting quality up to 4K to enhance the looks when the card drops the 4K image to convert to 1080p - and while it looks better - this is eating hella more processing power and there ain't no boosting FPS not happening
there's even upscaling settings in games like GTA V to boost the views but eats hella more VRAM above 13gb and beyond the capabilities of the 3060 12gb even - there's one setting beyond 5:2 ratio that's not doable with 3060 12gb and above total VRAM usage in a 10+ yr old game
I mean not trying to be a dick but resolution upscaling in that effect ain't never going to boost framerates - unless maybe you drank half a 5th of vodka, punched a cop, sent to prison for 11 years, finally made it out and dealing with 30 FPS @ 4K in AW2 because it's better than cooking ramens in hot shower water and the only way you getting a lukewarm meal bc no matter what block they got you in the boiler can't keep up with having to run 24/7 and plumbing system is failing - ain't even as hot as Walmart bathroom water - but otherwise you'd get a cold meal 3 times a day 😂
that's about the only scenario when image upscaling increases FPS - coming from prison where had a TV but no gaming then back to home & gaming and finally able to deal with 30 FPS @ 4K... like I said I know not of AMD 4K performance and not even sure of Nvidia and mostly bc while it would "look nicer, it absolutely 420% kills GPU performance"
not even sure of what settings in AMD Adrenalin app you would have access to on 7800xt - as I have an entirely 6yr old RX 570 8gb and not seeing more enhanced GPUs that aren't 3-4 generations old - considering 5000/6000 series AMD are above that and under the 7000 series plus the 7900/7950? XTX cards - which are nearly twice the power of 7800xt in terms of capability & maybe to get better performance should drop to 1440p display and numbers would skyrocket above 120 FPS - ngl I know not of the 4K side of things but even though both cards I have are 4K capable - they're at the lower end of the spectrum and thus I'm not pushing my two weak ass GPUs in 4K and aiming 1440p on 3060 12gb & 1080p on RX 570 8gb - with both cards - well mainly the RX 570 limited to the 40" Visio TV 1080p 60hz & 3060 12gb on a 27" LG 1440p 144hz
my point is though, my hardware isn't optimal with Ryzen 9 5900X & AMD RX 570 8gb/Nvidia 3060 XC 12gb - and low end of 4K gaming - long story short there was a GPU shortage during COVID pandemic when I built the PC & literally paid an extra $150-200 for a scalped GPU sale on FB Marketplace bc everyfuckingthing was sold out everywhere and it was that - plus also messaged 5000/6000 series AMD owners but the 3060 guy hmu first - and thus I dealt with the amount I had available to spend & what was available to buy then & in last 3 years eh unfortunately life's kicking my ass to save & move up to ultimate 4K gaming hardware & save for 3090/4090 etc or 7900 XTX even as the cheapest extreme 4K + acquiring that "currently on bonus sale for $1800US" Samsung Odyssey Neo dual 4K 57in curved monitor and though I plan on doing this "soon" - ngl I have other shit to be doing and have accepted the fact 4K gaming is gonna wait a bit and "it is what it is" and while your situation is different and "I'm happy for you" (yay! a fellow gamer made it to 4K heaven!) - again I know nothing of what could possibly limit 4K performance in any game and mostly because not rly interested in the subpar performance of a 6yr old RX 570 or 3060 12gb & both being the "it does 4K barely but performance is complete dogshit compared to 3090+ so why bother?" and thus stuck with 1440p as the best performance option & above 100 FPS in most games except for a few @ maxed settings which would beat down RX 570/3060 til they're dead vs spending $4000+ to achieve that ultimate 4K gaming performance and feels - and would be almost $8000 really - as I would move up to 9000X3D CPU & X870E chipset motherboard with a 5090 to power my next gen 4K build and not even push that shit on the current AM4 build with 5900X CPU - and while it does work, performance is bleh as there's much better for the purposes of gaming like 7950X3D - but my point is - eventually next PC is probably going to be a few years and moving up to AM6 CPU & motherboard before I dabble in true 4K and 8K+ gaming to be able to give you those answers - and is the ultimate bottom line in play here in my situation and why I went 1440p instead
OK that and I game semi pro in League of Legends & not even remotely playing anything that requires hella high PC specs - thus at present no point in moving up the ladder as gaming performance is better at 1440p anyways & really majority of pros use 1080p and deal with the bleh visuals and performance boost of 240 to 360hz refresh rates - especially when comes to competitive FPS gaming mostly - but others might prefer visuals over performance - this is the semi-pro part of "ain't making a ton of money off League or anything" - yknow to be putting thousands into a new PC before buying the gf a new kitten or remodeling the house and other shit - not that ya need to know but eh it's about where I'm at lmao and it'll be awhile before the above changes my gaming up to 4K and such
ichigokamisama@reddit
7800xt is a 1440p card and fsr at 4k looks fine anyway the biggest differences between dlss and fsr is at 1440p and 1080p, but the card can do those resolutions fine at native anyway. Heck fsr 2 or xess is fine at quality @1440p anyway
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
Taking out of your ass
7800XT runs many games well over 100 FPS at 1440p
XeSS looks same as dlss. I’ve owned Nvidia cards and compared it. You can look up screenshots online
Griffball889@reddit
False. Xess > fsr
kazuviking@reddit
Where do you even get that? XeSS is way better than FSR. XeSS DP4 is better than current FSR and the XMX version is borderline industinguishable from DLSS in image quality.
vainsilver@reddit
Most games now are designed with TAA. Disabling TAA breaks certain effects. DLSS is basically a more advanced and better looking version of TAA. Even if you are running a game natively, it will use TAA. DLSS will look significantly sharper running at a lower resolution than running a game at native resolution with TAA.
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
It’s all Nvidia marketing bullshit. I play with all those crap filters disabled
vainsilver@reddit
Lmao alright buddy.
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
Any upscaling reduces image quality. Doesn't matter if its DLSS or whatever.
Native resolution is the best. Anything else is a compromise. It loses pixels and interpolates them with an algorithm. It is fake.
Also mostly playing older games that don't even have upscaling as an option.
vainsilver@reddit
No playable native resolution now gets rid of aliasing without anti-aliasing techniques like TAA or DLSS. Not even 4K with downsampling.
I rather DLSS than native resolution any day. You just have some hate-on for NVIDA like they killed your dog.
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
I've owned multiple Nvidia RTX cards
I'm saying your argument is not convincing because I've used both and it seems like marketing BS. I don't want to depend on upscaling
Also native resolution just looks better to me. No fake pixels
vainsilver@reddit
What resolution do you play at?
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
3440x1440 100 Hz
Mostly older games so its not even pushing the card to 100% at 100 FPS
Cyberpunk is one exception, where it dips to 80 FPS without upscaling
Enabled XeSS there. Looks good.
vainsilver@reddit
You have an NVIDIA graphics card and use XeSS?
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
DLSS being higher quality than native is pure marketing bulllshit.
Their marketing is gaslighting people to believe that fewer pixels looks better. LOL I'm not a fucking moron. That is funny.
Nah currently using a 7800XT. XeSS works on recent AMD cards. I previously owned RTX cards. Maybe I'll get a 5080 next year.
DLSS is good but I'm not buying the insane bullshit from Nvidia marketing department. That is gaslighting.
vainsilver@reddit
It’s not marketing BS.
You can find clear examples that DLSS not only has better image quality than native resolution with TAA, but significantly better performance.
When was the last time you used DLSS? And the last NVIDIA graphics card you had?
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
DLSS is interpolation. It reduces the image resolution then reconstructs missing pixels with an algorithm.
There is a loss of information. Fundamentally you have lost information in the image that is being interpolated by an algorithm.
DLSS + TAA has clever antialiasing tricks, but that technique should also work without downscaling the image first.
I used DLSS a few weeks ago. There's no point arguing too much about what looks "better" if its a subjective preference.
vainsilver@reddit
It’s not a subjective preference. It’s objectively better image quality and the vast majority (non-deluded) people would agree with that.
Memory compression is also “loss” of information. VRAM specifically uses compression techniques as well. Many parts of the graphic rendering pipeline use compression techniques.
You may be trying to justify your AMD graphics card, but you don’t need to falsely claim something that is proven to be otherwise.
Enjoy your GPU.
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
Image quality is subjective by definition. The fact that upscaling loses information in the image is objectively true. Your feelings about image quality are subjective by definition. There is objectively less information in that image, because the pixels are not rendered.
This fanboy nonsense is insufferable.
I have cash in my savings to buy a massive pile of 4090s
I buy whatever suits my needs at the time
I switch between AMD and Nvidia regularly and sometimes I own both at the same time as I have two gaming PCs (one in office, one in lounge using it as a console with gamepad)
I chose 7800XT over the 4070S in this build because it was objectively superior for my specific needs
More VRAM and higher raw performance in Cyberpunk (and a few other games)
I would have felt stupid paying more for less
I can load 14B parameter LLMs on this cheaper 16GB card which simply can not fit on the more expensive 4070S with 12GB VRAM
Maybe next year I will buy a 5080 if the ray tracing performance is compelling enough (and there are actual interesting games to justify it. Too many trashy AAA games now. Outlaws sucks. I'm not buying a 4090 for that shitty ass game)
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
Image quality is objective by definition
This fanboy nonsense is insufferable.
I have cash in my savings to buy a massive pile of 4090s
I buy whatever suits my needs at the time
I switch between AMD and Nvidia regularly and sometimes I own both at the same time as I have two gaming PCs (one in office, one in lounge using it as a console with gamepad)
I chose 7800XT over the 4070S in this build because it was objectively superior for my specific needs
More VRAM and higher raw performance in Cyberpunk (and a few other games)
I would have felt stupid paying more for less
I can load 14B parameter LLMs on this card which simply can not fit on the 4070S with 12GB VRAM
Maybe next year I will buy a 5080 if the ray tracing performance is compelling enough (and there are actual interesting games to justify it. Too many trashy AAA games now. Outlaws sucks. I'm not buying a 4090 for that shitty ass game)
namelessted@reddit
All pixels are fake pixels.
Admiral_peck@reddit
Dlss is great bust FSR does the job and you're gonna be getting amazing image quality out of the 7800xt native anyways if you set things up right.
Upbeat-Banana-5530@reddit
How used to having it are you? I had a GTX 980ti before I had a 7800xt and I'm perfectly happy with either no upscaling in most games or FSR in the few where I need some extra frames. I was* also running them all in 4k on a GPU that was marketed for 1440, so I didn't really expect to have 200+ frames on everything.
*My kids broke the 4k monitor, so I'm back to 1080 until I can save up for another one. Unsurprisingly, the 7800xt consistently sends more frames than the monitor can display now.
taxmaster23@reddit
Not a fan of DLSS or FSR to be honest. I prefer to run my games in native. Maybe I’m just weird or play games where I see odd artifacts with it
green_meme@reddit
Yeah, I tried gaming w/ dlss and it just felt terrible. Native is def the way to go
Ok_Awareness3860@reddit
You can use XESS. it isn't as good but it's just fine.
Definitely_Not_Bots@reddit
If you play games that support upscaling, it's pretty good. But FSR is acceptable IMO and almost any game that has DLSS will have FSR.
SexBobomb@reddit
DLSS is good, but really not necessary, and FSR3 is very very good for when you need it
jesusrambo@reddit
You’re going to get a lot of enlightened redditors commenting whose opinion does not reflect reality
DLSS is absolutely night and day. Native vs upscale is not as much of a no brainer as these comments suggest
wyomingTFknott@reddit
The amount of people saying "swap it out" is kind of ridiculous.
I would never buy an AMD GPU any time soon because I have had driver issues in the past and by all accounts they still aren't at 100% for all games and I just don't want to deal with the headache because I'm old. But for a young enthusiast on a budget it's hard to argue against the bang-for-the-buck with AMD.
I see no reason why he should regret his purchase, even if it wasn't the one I would have made. Everyone's situation is different. There is no wrong answer. Just shades of grey.
I could've had the same reaction to buying my 4070 Super. It's natural to second-guess yourself a bit after you spend a relatively large amount of money on something so stupid. But I quickly got over it. Yes, I overspent on the Nvidia premium, yes I don't have as much VRAM as I would like. But am I happy with it? Absolutely, and OP should be happy with this card if it's doing the things he thought it would do when he bought it.
typographie@reddit
DLSS is a bigger loss than raytracing imo — mainly because I still view raytracing as an absurd waste of frames. Even on high-end Nvidia cards, you're giving up a ton, even if the results are closer to acceptable.
FSR does indeed offer poorer image quality than DLSS, but I still think it's good tech and worth using in many cases. Occasionally the quality difference is really obvious, but often not so much. Sometimes it feels like a small cost for a big framerate boost.
Some games support Intel XeSS, which will also work on an AMD card. That's a better option where available.
Necessary_Kiwi_7119@reddit
Does is actually incredibly good tbh. If you’re missing out on anything I would say that’s the only real nvidia feature I use often.
tonallyawkword@reddit
Basically. With that GPU, you'll likely get plenty of fps in most anything unless you turn on RT.
IMO, DLSS/FSR is a bigger deal for ppl with a GPU slower than the 7800xt. Not sure you'd even want to turn on RT half the time with something slower than a 4070Super.
Drenlin@reddit
DLSS is good but AMD's solution is still passable, and that card is fast enough to not need it in the overwhelming majority of games.
husky_hawk@reddit
If you want to play at 4K DLSS is incredible.
Kornillious@reddit
Dlss and Ray tracing combined makes a world of a difference. The AMD CPU is good but there hasn't been a reason to buy AMD GPU's in the last decade unless you hate NVidia like so many redditors do for some reason.
If you are within the return window then switch.
EnigmaSpore@reddit
Not gonna lie. DLSS is pretty damn amazing. Current going through RDR2 finally and i only have a 1080p ultrawide. The TAA in the game makes it a shimmering mess. I use DLDSR to run the game at 2.25x native in nvdia control panel. Then i set RDR2 to that resolution and now apply DLSS quality mode. Now it has cleared the image up so well all for a negligible performance hit.
DLAA, DLSS, DLDSR
it’s pretty awesome stuff honestly.
BoBSMITHtheBR@reddit
AMD has no comparison to DLDSR + DLSS… or dare I say it DLDSR + DLAA.
kazuviking@reddit
Nothing beats DLDSR+DLSS. In RDR2 it gies more details than native.
EnigmaSpore@reddit
yeah. it's pretty crazy how much better it looks vs native. but it actually does.
rppohqixortwphu@reddit
DLSS is a killer feature and the reason why 80% of the market chooses Nvidia. This sub downplays it for whatever reason. Your buyer's remorse is justified - return the AND GPU and get an Nvidia GPU instead.
garbageemail222@reddit
Because it's not worth the price premium. Honestly, it feels like Intel vs AMD 4 years ago when lots of people just "knew" that Intel was better and more than half the market refused to even consider AMD. Intel was using the higher and higher GHz "more power!" crutch as they dismissed the rising AMD. It's a little different as Nvidia makes great cards, but the price gouging is nauseating and Nvidia clearly stopped caring about its gaming customers. AMD has all the value, gives you better longevity with better VRAM, and I've never wished I had DLSS yet. I think it's only a matter of time before AMD upscaling is good enough anyway, Nvidia is racing diminishing returns with each upgrade.
FalseAgent@reddit
if you're targeting to play at 1080p then you can just play most games at native res without upscaling, no need to feel like you're missing out on dlss
United-Treat3031@reddit
Fsr is just as good.. btw as someone from europe i can tell you thats a great deal
Handsome_Warlord@reddit
To me, dlss isn't all that.
You made a good choice!
DYMAXIONman@reddit
DLSS vs FSR is a gigantic issue if you play in 4k. It's a bit of an issue if you play in 1440p. It's not an issue if you play 1080p.
Cloudmaster1511@reddit
Dlss is overhyped for nothing. On paper its okay'ish but irl it does nothing that fsr3 cant do. Plus its so unnecessary proprietary that it is almost never to be seen anywhere. While fsr is open source, hugely supported AND csn also manually added to EVERY game.
qFrozt@reddit
For me DLSS is whats keeping me on NVIDIA. Ray Tracing is irrelevant for me
G0ldenZERO@reddit
As someone with a 7900xt I really wish I had gone NVIDIA. Ray tracing is whatever but I really wish I had DLSS. FSR looks awful at balanced or lower (quality is ok) playing at 4k. And the thing is the lower end you go with graphics cards the more this matters since you’ll rely on upscaling more. There have also been a handful of instances where I’ve had driver issues that did not affect my friends on NVIDIA cards, although that’s more anecdotal.
Pythonmsh@reddit
Youll get better drivers with nvidia. Amd is definitely the value king though
Prathh99@reddit
Your card is MORE than capable enough to play all games at 1440p ultra natively, without the need for any frame gen tech.
So, yup, DLSS isn't worth much at the moment. If in the coming years, games keep on becoming more and more un-optimised, then you might have to use frame gen to the latest titles. But I bet FSR will be very closely competing with DLSS by then.
Inside-Line@reddit
I think your card should be able to run any AI based upscaling AMD comes up with and they generally support their previous
bosman3131@reddit
Amd seems to improve their tech i have the same setup as you. What i am worried is games that have built in (baked in) ray tracing in them like silent hill 2 remake i think B. M. Wukong also has it which makes rtx cards perform better.
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
RT is optional in wukong
Expensive_Bottle_770@reddit
It’s not really. The lowest setting is the only one not making use of Lumen or otherwise, and it looks like hot garbage. Path Tracing is optional, which is what the RT setting is in that game.
Eastern-Professor490@reddit
lumen does not have the same nvidia bias though, there are some ue5 games where amd is on par with equivalent nvidia cards. it depends on the implementation though and if the game is optimized for amd as well. given the market share of amd that is often not the case. ray tracing specifically though is the biggest issue bc it has a heavy nvidia bias no matter the optimization
JetpackBattlin@reddit
Yeah hardware ray tracing is the only thing that matters. Everything else is just consumer buzz words.
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
But yes there is nothing else besides improved upscaling and faster RT
I run games without upscaling or RT so don’t care
VadimDash1337@reddit
Not really. 7800xt can pull good frames in a lot of games even without upscaling. Framegen helps, and FSR 3.1 is pretty nice from what I've heard.
Running the same gpu as you, but with a 9700k instead of 7500f, want to upgrade to the same cpu hahaha
hamsik86@reddit
Productivity, machine learning, stable drivers releases
hamsik86@reddit
As usual team red folks downvoting for stating facts
OvertimeWr@reddit
That makes no sense. Enabling ray tracing on an AMD is going to look like shit so of course they're going to be like "nah it's not worth it."
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
The image quality is exactly the same on AMD. It’s just slower. There is no difference in rendering
karmapopsicle@reddit
AMD does not have anything equivalent to Nvidia's ray reconstruction, which delivers some quite substantial image quality improvements for RT-heavy titles, even more so for RTGI.
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
Oh that's interesting. I didn't know that
Still wouldn't use RT below a 4080. Personally I can't accept the massive hit in performance.
Wasn't prepared to pay double for that. The difference isn't that compelling to me.
Maybe will upgrade to 5080 next year if the ray tracing performance reaches 4090 level and there are actual good games to justify it. Too many shitty ass "AAAA" games (Outlaws is lame. Not worth spending thousands of dollars for that)
karmapopsicle@reddit
I'm on the other end of the spectrum for sure. I'm 100% in the eye candy enthusiast camp, and very much in the RT enthusiast camp since I got my first taste back in 2019.
For some perspective I played through CP2077 with full pathtracing on my 3090 at around 35-40FPS and enjoyed every moment of it.
I think the tipping point for RT, and specifically RTGI/pathtracing, is that we now have solid enough software RT lighting with tools like UE5's Lumen that developers can much more easily build out their games for RTGI right from the start, rather than the typical RT shadows/reflections/AO effects on top of existing baked lighting systems that have been the most common up to this point.
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
Yes exactly it is subjective. I couldn't deal with 35 FPS
I would need a 4090, which is more than I'm willing to pay for these toys.
Rumors say that 5080 will match or exceed 4090 performance, with lower power consumption. Looking forward to the announcement in January.
OvertimeWr@reddit
Lol no.
Lowback@reddit
Missing out on video codecs. Cuda core if someone ever wanted to experiment with creative software, or Ai. Missing out on remote play features. Better VR wireless streaming codec implementations. Better video compression.
OP, Imma address you if you are reading this. Nvidia works towards smart solutions to computation problems whenever possible. It's like an agile 2 or 4 door small car. AMD graphics are just a fucking diesel tow truck. They smash through all issues with more ram and more raw raster performance. The drivers are and always will be the big problem. If you want the "It just works" experience, go Nvidia. If you are adept at creating custom profiles for multiple games to get around AMD driver issues, by all means, go AMD.
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
100+ games in my Steam library, owned Nvidia cards since 2001, Radeon cards since 2002, and never had issues with drivers.
Maybe I'm lucky but I've been running games on these cards for more than 20 years and never, ever had issues with drivers. It's always been "just works" for me and I've lost count of the Radeon's I've owned over the past 22 years.
The amount of Nvidia marketing fanboy garbage in this thread is ridiculous. AMD cards run the games perfectly fine. PS5 / PS5 Pro runs on AMD and no one calls that a "diesel truck"
Lowback@reddit
Depends what you play. If you're a big name release, any issues get addressed fast. If your game is indie, you fix it yourself, or your customers have to change settings. 7 Days to Die had a terrain bug for 9 months before AMD addressed it, where you would see through the polygons between edgeloops. It was disgusting. I personally went back and forth with AMD engineers over this issue in a ticket. They also had numerous problems with the first borderlands game when gearbox wasn't a big fucking deal. There was also all the crashes that the AMD "chill" feature caused. Their low latency implementation was also triggering anticheat bans.
I've been using PCs since 1993 and building them since 1997. I've used AMD graphics when it was still ATi, and since AMD bought them.
It's not marketing garbage. I use Automatic1111 to do some Ai stuff. Do you have any idea how much of a nightmare it is to get graphics card computation up and running with that? Even worse with Forge/ReForge or ComfyUI. Do I gamestream to my living room? Sure fucking do. Does that same technology backbone support steamVR better, and remote desktop? Sure fucking does. Is the Ai filtering of backround noise from my microphone useful? Very! Call it marketing wank if you want, but it's on you if you don't use features on offer.
That is one specific environment. With one chipset. This comment alone tells me you don't know nearly as much as you think you do. No PC game has that luxury. It is a lot more complex to make drivers that will work with 8 different motherboard chipsets then it is to make a driver work well with one single chipset. Never having to worry about firmware updates. Always assured the games will force driver updates as needed, knowing the OS and all it's patches, revisions and code libraries are correct? This is why bringing up console is irrelevant in this sense.
Happy for you.
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
Dude you are telling me a GPU more VRAM makes it inferior, like a diesel truck
That is Nvidia marketing brain damage
I run 14B parameter LLMs on my 16GB 7800XT that simply would not fit on a more expensive 4070S with 12GB VRAM
Lowback@reddit
If you need to burn 10 miles per gallon, and the other car burns 30 miles per gallon, it is unfair to say the smaller gas tank is a disadvantage because you are completely sucking the context out of the comparison. Not only that, but more ram running at much higher power draw just to be as-performant, is a waste of electricity. A hotter bedroom. A higher monthly bill.
Use xformers? Pytorch? Stage your Vram instead of trying to load everything into it all at once all of the time? Use half VAEs especially since the results are indistinguishable? Throwing more vram at your lack of optimization is fine I guess but I've coached others on setting up for 12gb just fine.
Not really. Great amounts of money made on subscribestar and patreon are from homebrew 1 man/woman shows. People making porn, or games, or porn games, and having good options to dip your toes into literally any program and get going is useful. Almost every creative software works well with Nvidia. Only some creative software works well with AMD.
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
LOL
You are actually trying to gaslight me into believing that 16GB of VRAM is worse than 12GB of VRAM
The texture is the same size on Nvidia or AMD. It's a texture
The LLM model is the same size on Nvidia or AMD. It's a model.
There is no secret voodoo withcraft making Nvidia defy the laws of mathematics.
Nvidia marketing causes brain damage
I have owned many Nvidia and AMD cards and just buy whatever is best suited for my needs at the time
But your points are quite idiotic
Lowback@reddit
Once again proving you don't know what you're talking about. Not only are they coming up with Ai texture compression that will make future textures much smaller in memory, regardless of what they are on the drive now... Running DLSS results in smaller shader caches, smaller textures, smaller shadowmaps, smaller cube maps, smaller PBR metallic maps. I mean, my guy, I am literally the holder of a diploma in game development, animation and motion graphics.
Again. Context. If my Nvidia card can preform stage 1, 2 and 3 and it takes 10 seconds. And 2 of that seconds is switching things out of VRAM, that will still beat the pants off an AMD card that can skip switching things out of VRAM if the AMD card can't complete the same task in less than 10 seconds.
I have an NVMe, a lot of people do, and resizable bar. Moving things onto and off of the graphics card doesn't matter as much as your computation time.
It's still income. Some other people sell their idle computer time to render farms. Plenty of homebrew indie projects out there that need baked maps for entire levels or they want to do a warhammer fan movie, etc.
I get it. You're not a power user. You only take the most surface level information into account. Say less.
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
Dude at the end of the day, you're working for the Nvidia marketing department
No amount of gaslighting and bullshit can convince me that 12GB is better than 16GB for current games or for loading an LLM
You should get a job at Nvidia
Lowback@reddit
It's not gaslighting dude. DLSS bases everything off a lower resolution, which sets off a cascade of texture quality reductions. At render, the tensor cores reconstruct the missing information as best it can. This is why the exact same game at 4k uses so much more vram and takes so much longer to load then when that game is played at 1440p. It's endemic to every engine. When you have upscaling technology in play, everything in ram gets to be smaller than normal.
Again. It doesn't matter if you can do everything in one trip if that trip takes you twice or three times as long. The only fucking reason AMD is on the map right now at all in these tasks is because people hacked CUDA to opensource it in a shoestring and bubblegum fashion for AMD cards. Which hey, is a good thing, but AMD still wasn't designed for this at the chip level. Emulation is always slower than native.
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
AMD also uses texture compression. Yes DLSS has marginally better quality. So what? The actual difference is negligible. When playing games I don't hit pause and study the pixels with an electron microscope. It makes no practical difference. I don't see the difference when playing.
AMD is catching up there anyway. But honestly the difference in quality is not noticeable to me. I simply don't care. Games all look cartoony on Nvidia and they all look cartoony on AMD. A couple of pixels don't make a huge difference.
https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-to-present-neural-texture-block-compression-in-london-rivals-nvidias-texture-compression-research
I've seen Cyberpunk running side by side on 4070S and 7800XT. The 7800XT had higher frame rate without upscaling, so that wins for me
I'm mostly playing older games that don't even have FSR or DLSS as an option. Native resolution only. AMD raw performance wins there.
You have different needs/requirements and there's nothing wrong with that
Lowback@reddit
We're not talking about quality. We're talking about ram saving technology = less ram required for same task.
The point is, you only need to have a gigantic gas tank if you require a lot of gas to go vroom vroom. Stop being obtuse and talking in circles. It's along the lines of thinking that the only thing that matters about an engine is how many cylinders it has. Nope! Way more complex than that.
AMD has literally stated they're leaving the highend market. They also generally have smaller bit bandwidths for their memories, and often times have smaller caches on their GPUs. They also often run slower memory, like last years or two years ago in terms of generation. Why? Because people like yourself just compare line items and think bigger is better.
So the increased vram you're crowing about isn't even all that relevant because the titles you're playing were produced when 12gb was the most you could get... this is pretty amusing.
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
It's not obtuse. They both use texture compression. Nvidia compression may be slightly better.
I didn't say that I exclusively play those older games
I buy new games too, and plan to buy new games which will be using more VRAM. And as I said, I'm loading LLMs that CANNOT fit in a 12GB Nvidia card.
You are trying way too hard to shill for Nvidia here. It's childish.
I have enough cash to buy a massive fucking pile of 4090s. I don't give a fuck about these companies. They are not sports teams.
I choose the best card for my specific needs at the time. I switch between AMD and Nvidia regularly and sometimes I own both at the same time.
Probably will get a 5080 next year and put the 7800XT in the lounge PC
Saneless@reddit
But even then, what you get for your $450 is probably better at RT, or close, for what you get with NVidia at $450
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
At low RT settings it is close to Nvidia performance
At full RT settings the performance gap is huge
https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GQofC5RFonswVPJ7E5VqBM-1200-80.png.webp
https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/x9q9MqQroCPqDLdL9CvPeL-1200-80.png.webp
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html
toph1980@reddit
Upscaling > ray tracing and Nvidia does both much better
As for CPU, depends if it's a PC solely for gaming, productivity or both
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
Yes but I prefer not using any upscaling as it reduces resolution and image quality
Buy a faster GPU if it can’t run at native resolution
7800XT is powerful enough for that
karmapopsicle@reddit
But that's the thing - Nvidia's image reconstruction algorithm is so good it can straight up look better than native resolution. I will pretty much universally enable DLSS Quality mode whenever available, except in cases where DLAA is available and I have sufficient performance overhead anyway. Even when I can run native just fine, the AA provided by DLSS/DLAA is just better than FXAA/MSAA/TAA solutions.
All that said though - in that ~$450 price range the 7800 XT is more than enough faster to very reasonably justify giving up DLSS compared to say a 4060 Ti 16GB. Feels a little bit like Nvidia is kind of intentionally leaving the 4060 Ti as a terrible value to cede at least some portion of the market to AMD.
Elitefuture@reddit
If you compare it to the similarly priced 4060 ti, the rt on the 7800xt is actually better... the next performance level is the 4070, but that's the same price as the 7900 gre.
Nvidia has no good cards at the $430 mark. The 4060 ti is horrible value. Below the 4070 super are all fairly low value.
karmapopsicle@reddit
Yeah 4060 Ti is in a really poor spot for both the 8GB and 16GB variants. I almost wonder if this is straight up by design so Nvidia ensures AMD has at least one spot in the stack where they're competitive enough to drive sales, without really cutting into Nvidia's higher margin cards above it. Even with the relatively terrible value the 4060/4060 Ti have still amassed a pretty substantial marketshare - a non-trivial portion of which likely coming from prebuilts.
Remaining 6650XT stock at ~$220 is a pretty compelling option for 1080p compared to the 4060. And the 7800 XT's ~40% uplift over the 4060 Ti 16GB's raster performance at $450 is really solid as well (though that does drop to <10% in RT) - at least in terms of raster perf that's realistically enough for most people to forego DLSS and the rest of Nvidia's feature set.
Someone_thatisntcool@reddit
He could've paid more for less VRAM and Watts. Amazing!
Blindfire2@reddit
And on dlss not having nearly as many artifacts as fsr, and frame gen also having way less artifacting when in use on 40X0 cards
Rough-Donkey-747@reddit
Frame gen sucks on any card. It's an anti-feature. I would never use it on any card.
Upscaling is also inferior to native resolution (doesn't matter if its DLSS or whatever, it is fake interpolated pixels).
Native resolution > upscaling
Real frames > frame gen
7800XT is powerful enough to handle new games at 1440p \~100FPS without any fake pixels or fake frames.
When its too slow to run these games natively without crap filters, sell it and upgrade.
If you have to use upscaling or frame gen the card is just too slow. But 7800XT or 4070S and above has the raw performance to not need it.
Mundane-Expert7794@reddit
Nvidia is better at the high end but for the price of a 7800xt,?its tough to beat it.
DYMAXIONman@reddit
The 7800XT is still a great GPU, especially if you're playing at 1080p. I think you're only missing out if you're spending way more than that.
E-Zees-Crossovers@reddit
Agreed. 7800xt is the highest value point per dollar.
Going up to 7900xt adds additional $300+ cost. A 7800xt is easily found under $500, even for the most premium cards. 7700xt is under $400. 7900xt is $750+, which adds quite a jump.
DYMAXIONman@reddit
The big thing is that entry level and mid-range cards are bad at ray tracing anyway, so it makes more sense to just get more FPS with AMD.
FHMO@reddit
You have a good combo, if it’s any consolation I moved from 4070 ti to 7800 xt recently I got the sapphire one and I’ve never been any more happier with my pc. I had an annoying issue with the drivers update from nvidia that triggered me I couldn’t justify the high cost with the experience I was getting that was my reason to switch.
FHMO@reddit
I also don’t like RTX as it looks like it applies Vaseline to the surfaces, I’ve always had it switched off while using the previous GPU!
FinestKind90@reddit
If you’re doing anything like photo or video editing nvidia is better, I use adobe lightroom with my 6700xt and it chugs a little but is totally usable
VascoC@reddit
I mean what rtx gpu could you get for that budget where u live? Rx 7800xt is pretty much a rtx 4070 super playing native ofc and the rtx is expensiveee
nvcma@reddit
at this moment, anyone going amd route is pretty smart imo. unlike me who's waiting for 5090.
im buying it for work anyway..... is my copium.
Turn-Dense@reddit
No RT that in many modern games looks amazing, no dlss, no framegen, no RR, worse drivers, stutters and worse performance in dx11. And many small features. But its good for playing dx12 non rt games… i mean there are fee of those and nvidia also can run it without issues but hey at least something
searchableusername@reddit
7800xt is limited in terms of rt performance, but it's a great card compared to its closest competitors, 4060ti and 4070 (and especially compared to 4060ti 16gb..)
E-Zees-Crossovers@reddit
For the dollars spent, 7800xt is a fantastic value. Depending on model, you are maybe $100 higher then 7700xt cost, but to step up to 7900xt you are adding $300+.
Being so close to next gen cards releasing early 2025, I'd have a hard time recommending anyone go higher then 7800xt right now. 7700xt and 7800xt are great values, and will perform for a long time. If someone wants to spend more $$$ then that, consider waiting for the next gen cards to release.
Elitefuture@reddit
Save $200? Wouldn't it be spend the extra $200 for the 4080 super?
kazuviking@reddit
He meant save 200€ is to spend 200€ extra for the 4080 super.
Elitefuture@reddit
Ahh I see now
vitek6@reddit
I bought RX6800 and I won't buy it second time. I would pay more for nvidia for ray tracing, dlss, machine learning performance.
Liambp@reddit
7800XT is the best card available at its price point. It will play any game out there at pretty graphics settings and high framerates today and for the next couple of years at least. Its 16Gb of VRAM will help its longevity compared to the more expensive Nvidia RTX 4070 which has only 12Gb.
The key phrase here is "at its price point". People will tell you that Nvidia cards have better features and this is true. Nvidia cards in particular are better at Ray Tracing, at upscaling (DLSS) and at video encoding. This is all true but you will pay substantially more for an Nvidia card with similar levels of performance to the 7800Xt.
Arxson@reddit
May someone please help me understand about DLSS?
If I was buying a 7800XT and only wanting to play at 1440, if that card is already capable of full 1440 resolution with ultra settings in most games, then why would I need DLSS or any other upscaling technology? Thanks in advance!
dfm503@reddit
DLSS and FSR can still give a better experience, sometimes it makes a 60fps experience bump to 100fps for example. FSR has gotten decent enough now that DLSS is less of a selling point. DLSS is superior, but the gap is much smaller than it used to be.
EnforcerGundam@reddit
Cause devs can’t make games for shit anymore, slap dlss/fsr as a optimization means
McGundulf@reddit
There are plenty of ways to affect an image output by a GPU. The standard way an image is produced is through native resolution. It's when the card renders everything by itself and produces a "true" image of the game.
Then there is upscaling. What DLSS does, is the following: the GPU renders the game at a lower resolution and then uses AI technology to reconstruct the rendered image at a higher resolution. This allows you to produce more frames as your card rasterizes at a lower and less demanding resolution. DLSS image is slightly (but unnoticeably) worse (most of the time) than a true native image.
The way to create the best highest quality image though, is to downscale. Meaning the card renders an image at a higher resolution and downscales it to a lower one. This removes most imperfections theoretically.
The 40 series cards also have the feature: frame generation. What frame generation does, is that it basically creates an extra ai generated frame between each two frames, making the game more smooth and in theory doubling your frame rate. Though, this creates a bit of extra latency, which can be somewhat mitigated with Nvidia reflex. It's highly recommended for AAA titles and single player games, if you need the extra frames. It's also worth noting that ai frames are not as good as actual frames but it's negligible. Ai frames are made by reading 2 consecutive frames and creating an extra "ai frame" to stand between them. So, these ai frames will inherit issues of the actual frames.
piggymoo66@reddit
There are some other considerations for Nvidia's visual enhancements. The biggest issue with frame gen is that it introduces latency. It also takes some processing overhead and VRAM to run, so while it technically "doubles" your frame rate, because your native fps drops when using it, you end up with something like 1.5x frame rate instead.
Nvidia's stuff is such an interesting catch-22 case. These features would be greatest for the older GPUs people have, but because it's hardware locked, they cannot use it. It would also benefit lower end cards, but they don't have enough processing power or VRAM to fully take advantage of it. So these performance helpers only end up helping the midrange and high-end.....? It's a strange situation.
M3RCURYMOON@reddit
5 years down the road when games require much better technology than a 7800xt or 4070 super without dlss enabled dlss or amd version of upscaling will be needed if you dont want to upgrade hardware again. Or maybe even sooner if the standard for monitors changes from 1440p to 4k upscaling will be a good option to have for people who want to enjoy their game with graphic settings ramped all the way up
Arxson@reddit
Ah, so future games that you want to try and keep high settings for, the card will output to 1080 and then use upscaling tech to keep displaying at 1440?
Does stuff like DLSS handle that for you, or do you manually configure the game down to 1080 ultra, and then tell DLSS to upscale to 1440?
Rainbows4Blood@reddit
DLSS handles this for you. Set the game to the resolution you want to play at as normal, turn on the upscaler. The upscaler will Render at a lower resolution internally and scale to your chosen resolution.
M3RCURYMOON@reddit
I don’t know all the details about how dlss works but on games that I use it on I set my resolution to 1440p whack all my graphics to the max and set dlss on quality mode and it seems to significantly boost my fps for example cyberpunk I play with everything maxed out and ray tracing on full I get a consistent 80-90fps but turn dlss and frame gen off I get 30-45. I honestly cannot tell the difference in graphics between dlss on or off which is good if it means I can over double my frames
Arxson@reddit
Wow yeah OK that’s quite amazing, and sounds like it’s handling it all for you once you enable it.
So people prefer DLSS in general to AMDs version (FRS?) in that it just looks better, or it actually performs better at doing that job?
MetatronTheArcAngel@reddit
It performs better at doing its job because Nvidia cards have dedicated hardware to examine each frame to “predict” the next frame. Amd Frame Gen on the other hand is just software.
TransientSpark23@reddit
It looks better - more stable/far less shimmering.
TheRealMangoJuice@reddit
Dlss improves fps substabcjally more on 4k compared to 1440p compared to 1080p. It's not there to give fps that you lack but fps that you want. If you're below 60fps it ain't going to help much.
Elitefuture@reddit
Future games, but nvidia tends to hold back features from their old cards. Their 30 series doesn't have frame gen for whatever reason.
Affectionate-Memory4@reddit
You set DLSS or amd's FSR or Intel's XeSS to some preset and leave the in-game resolution as is. They do the lower resolution internally and then target whatever the game is set to.
The odd man out is RSR, which is in your 7800XT drivers. This one needs you to set the game resolution lower and then scales to the monitor's resolution. Use this on games where there's no XeSS or FSR, and use XeSS if you have the option. The performance uplift isn't as good as FSR, but it generally looks more like DLSS.
bionicbob321@reddit
DLSS/FSR/XeSS automatically sorts out the render resolution, and upscales back to your monitor's resolution. You choose the quality setting you want, and it does the rest. (higher quality means higher render resolution, which means better graphics and worse performance).
Expensive_Bottle_770@reddit
Some games are harder to run than others. The 7800XT averages 120 fps at 1440 ultra, so for most they fall short of their monitors refresh. On some games nowadays it’s almost a necessity due to poor optimisation.
Depending on what you play though it may or may not be important.
pmerritt10@reddit
For most single player games 60 is ok and 90hz or better is a very good experience which the 7800xt is pretty good at even with the most demanding games (may have to lower settings to high in the very most demanding ones.) Absolutely no need to try and shoot for your 120+hz refresh rate(s). In fact, if you don't play competitive shooters anything over 120hz is somewhat overkill.
7800xt is more than capable to max out most competitive shooters at 1440p that's kind of a non issue.
Expensive_Bottle_770@reddit
The point about refresh rates wasn’t supposed to be the focus. It was just an example of where some may use upscaling.
But in general, a tool that enables a better net experience for the user should never be discounted. I own a 4080 and regularly leverage DLSS, because on many games I play, for example, Ultra + RT on DLSS Q looks better than ultra alone at native and both run at similar framerates.
But based on your reply, I should find little use for DLSS on my GPU, yet that’s not reflective of my experience as a user.
Similarly, this doesn’t mean it’s always a huge benefit just based on my experience.
The point I’m trying to communicate here is that it’s a tool that many will find use in depending on their graphical preferences and what they play, even with higher end GPUs, as an answer to the question they asked.
So extra frames at little visual cost is a no brainer, even if you could settle on 60-90 as you mentioned (which does not speak for everyone’s preferences), 120 fps with little visual difference is better regardless, so upscaling still is not useless there.
Just how well an upscaler preserves this visual quality against framerate will therefore directly impact its utility, which is also why DLSS vs FSR is commonly brought up.
pmerritt10@reddit
I feel you ... If you have DLSS then I'm definitely not saying don't use it. I was literally just speaking my 2c about your comment about not being able to match the monitors refresh as it's honestly not all that important (referring, as I said, to solo games)
I'm actually hoping that AMD ends up getting something similar when fsr4 is finally released. That would be an amazing addition for my 7800xt.
Key-Pace2960@reddit
More often than not it's worth turning on just to improve the image quality over sub par TAA implementations. And more performance is always nice to have, enabling either higher frame rates or higher graphics settings. The 7800XT is a solid 1440p card but it's far from overkill for it and a more powerful card or alternatively one with access to a better upscaler will provide a better experience.
IDK unless you're using a 4090 on a 1080p monitor you'd almost always benefit from more performance, provided you have a CPU that can keep up.
anzurakizz@reddit
Here is an example but with FSR. I have a 4GB RX 580. I really wanted to play Ghost of Tsushima when it launched. I have a 1440p monitor (i know a terrible combo) and the game was not playable in native 1440p. With FSR balanced I got 30 to 40fps on 1440p. Yes it looked worse than native but it was still better than 1080p. If you plan to keep the card for a very long time, in the long run, upscaling will be needed. If you change it every two years, you probably will never use it.
Majoorazz@reddit
You don't if the game runs good without. That being said every graphics card can be brought to it's knees very quickly with raytracing so even a 7800XT is dependent on upscaling to reach playable framerates in certain titles when maxed out. Upscaling will also help alot as the card gets older and games get more demanding.
Ktrell2@reddit
I grabbed the 7900XT at $630 on prime days for the 20mb VRAM. When you say better at encoding I figured a 20mb card would be enough for 2k video work, I do play games, but what’s important is work. Is this card enough to edit and encode 20-30 min video at 2k, fast and without hassle? I’m currently on a i7 6700 and a 1060 and is getting pretty annoying to do those things with ease. Gaming wise too. Even cs2 feels choppy at times. And I don’t play big map BR games anymore bc of this too.
00Cubic@reddit
gpus these days, having so little vram
like cmon only 20MB on a $1000 7900XT!!!!
Ktrell2@reddit
I got it for $630 two days ago. What you mean $1000?
00Cubic@reddit
oh yeah the 7900XT is $630\~ i was thinking of the 7900XTX lmao
Ktrell2@reddit
20 mb is plenty for $630. I don’t know if will work flawlessly and easy for work.
00Cubic@reddit
wait you havent gotten the joke yet
(20 MB is 0.02 GB I was making a joke about your typo of saying MB when you meant GB)
also to your point, the 7900XT is an amazing card and 20GB is more then enough for like every conceivable consumer desktop work situation
Ktrell2@reddit
Sry, I didn't. Good joke to be honest :). I'm a square.
Liambp@reddit
I can't say. I am just a gamer I don't do any encoding. My gut feeling is that it will be much faster than a 1060 at everything but I am not the expert.
El_Diablosauce@reddit
More vram does not equate to inherently higher fps or longevity. If you think vram is all that counts, then I have a nvdia tesla p40 I'll sell to you for a little under a 7900xtx
Liambp@reddit
No but we have already passed the point where AAA games are being throttled by 8Gb and a lot of folk are predicting that the 12 Gb limits will soon be breached.
Atrium41@reddit
It's not even that upscaling, encoding and RT is garbage/unusable. It's just not as amazing
ScheerschuimRS@reddit
No dlss and worse ray tracing is going to be worse future proofing with this combo.
Barefoot_Mtn_Boy@reddit
Is this a prebuilt? Or are you putting it together? If you're not going to build it yourself, then what exactly IS everything else? Monitor...?
Why not 7600 or 7600x3d? The 7500f is basically a 7600 that drops the integrated graphics, which I don't recommend EVER! Whether AMD or Intel, getting a processor without integrated graphics basically leaves your number one troubleshooting tool behind. You can find hundreds of posts regretting it. I've seen at least 3 posts this week where people are finding out how much time having the igpu could've saved them trying to find out what their video problems were. If there's no picture, you fall back on that integrated graphics port to find out if it's the graphics card, or cable, or a driver issue, etc!
If you are not building it yourself, to me, your location and budget matters. In some parts of the planet that may be a good price, depending on 'what' the price includes.. Also, are you using it for JUST gaming, or gaming AND productivity? Intel is better when it comes to doing both, where AMD is better at gaming alone.. More information would be helpful to us.
For your budget, what Intel stuff is available?
Shining_prox@reddit
Every ue5 game is running like gpu 3 tiers down..(silent hill 2 running like Aa4070 super)x I’m xtx owner and I’m starting to regret the buy hard
uzuziy@reddit
That's literally the only game where, other UE5 titles work just fine.
Shining_prox@reddit
Mmmh wukong? Hellblade? The last 3 massive ue5 games - same behavior
uzuziy@reddit
Other UE5 games works fine for me
Shining_prox@reddit
… what other games are there over the one IV mentioned? And define”fine”
uzuziy@reddit
For Wukong and Hellblade 2 for example, my 7700xt just performs like how you'd expect it to. It falls just between 4060ti and 4070. It's closer to 4070 in Hellblade 2 and closer to 4060ti in Wukong. For games made in other engines it's basically performs like a 4070.
Lurk_while_I_Work@reddit
As someone who went from an 7900xtx to a rtx 4090 because I thought I was missing put by going the AMD route I can confidently tell you that you are not missing out at all, at max settings and raytracing on cyberpunk both were getting around 100fps and there was about a 10-20 fps difference in favor of the 4090, at that fps it is not noticable and I always feel ripped off paying a ridiculous amount more for the 4090 and getting practically nothing to show for it
LucidFir@reddit
If I didn't want to make censorship free AI content... I would have gotten an AMD.
Antique_Repair_1644@reddit
The 7800XT is a really, really good GPU. You're probably feeling FOMO because of all the Raytracing Marketing and Propaganda, but trust me it's not as big as the internet makes it seem. Just look at the Steam Hardware Survey and you'd see that about 5% of all the PC Players actually have GPUs that can run Raytracing properly and most games dont even support it.
Additionally, AFMF2 is really great and XeSS is a really good upscaling technique, so all you're missing out on is Raytracing.
kazuviking@reddit
There is DLDSR, Nvidia Brodacast , RTX-HDR, DLSS, DLAA, Nvidia Reflex, AI + most sofwatre optimized for nvidia. You are missing out on a lot of stuff.
Floripa95@reddit
Nowadays AMD has equivalents to almost all the stuff you listed
kazuviking@reddit
Equalent meaning inferior.
Antique_Repair_1644@reddit
Nvidia is definitely better on the software side and some things you listed are useful, but most people dont know what that shit even is, even less people use them. OP obviously doesn't need any of that and mainly wants to play video games, otherwise he would have already known what GPU brand his software needs.
Also, I can just list all of AMDs features as well: AMD Adrenalin Software, HYPR-RX, AFMF2, Anti-Lag, Radeon Boost, FSR, Radeon Chill, FRTC, Enhanced Sync, RIS, Integer Scaling, ReLive, Adrenalin Performance Tuning, SAM, HYPR-RX eco, Perfomance monitoring, FreeSync Premium, CAS, VRS, AMD Link, SR-IOV, SmartShift and thats not even mentioning the AMD Pro Features.
You are missing out on a lot of stuff...
kazuviking@reddit
Half of what you said is just marketing and not related at all. I couldve said gsync, gfore experience, gforce control panel, shadow play, instant playback ETC. Nvidias list would be a whole ass wall op text.
Antique_Repair_1644@reddit
Congratulations, you were today years old when you realised most of the advertised software is just a marketing gimmick with no real-world benefit, aiming at making you spend more money for the same product.
Interesting_Yogurt43@reddit
Not if he doesn’t really use most of these things like any normal person wouldn’t.
Top_Beginning_4886@reddit
They cover gaming, streaming, AI or 3D work. There are a bunch of "normal" people that do at least one of those.
DependentOnIt@reddit
Shouldn't have been baited by an amd GPU then bud
Jako998@reddit
If you don't care for Ray tracing then in my opinion, you are not missing out and you are Fine.
randompoe@reddit
Depends on you. I vastly prefer high frame rates and native resolution in games. So for me AMD is perfect. If you like what I classify as "gimmicks" then Nvidia is miles ahead. Many people really love those "gimmicks" though. To be fair me saying they are gimmicks is a bit harsh, they just come with heavy downsides. Like ray tracing halves your fps, no thanks. Upscaling makes your image look objectively worse, I prefer native tyvm. Frame gen adds significant latency. If these technologies didn't have any downsides then I'd find them way more compelling.
Piotr_Barcz@reddit
As a diehard Nvidia fan (GeForce experience alone might be the best software for recording games, optimizing settings automatically, installing drivers, etc. that ever existed) I would DEFINITELY go for an Nvidia card (also CUDA cores are insanely good for running neural network based algorithm software and AMD dun't have that so getting an Nvidia card means the prospective buyer will be able to use that computer for more if you ever plan to sell it down the line)
systemBuilder22@reddit
You got an awesome machine that can even play a little 4K which NVidia would deny you on purpose! Note that with all their gimmicks, NVidians spend more time playing with their gimmicks than playing with their games!
Most people are foolish. They think that decreasing frame rate by 30% so they can see puddle reflections is a buff. Actual human factors studies prove its a biff (back to the future), not a buff!
baconspam420@reddit
Wirh that combo you have no need for dlss or upscaling for 1440p play, only real thing for gaming you'll get from.nvidia is the ray tracing and at this point without dlss you getting 35% the fps for nice puddle reflections and sunbeams its not rly to the point of working well enough to be a selling point to me. You got a nice combo of cpu and gpu with good upgrade path. Enjoy what you got and stop focusing on what ppl that paying too much for a gpu to game on(different story if you edit tons videos and do bunch ai work) but for gaming you got amazing set up for the price point if didn't build yourself and in area for expensive parts. If you are just a gamer you don't need the bells n whistles from Nvidia to run games in native 1440p at high refresh rate.
Don't give in to FOMO
commontatersc2@reddit
Don’t compare.
ReinUwU@reddit
only thing with NVIDIA that amd doesn't have is Raytracing if that's not what you are interested in the AMD is the route much more affordable pricing of GPU's with more VRAM where I am you can grab a 16gb gpu for $800 where as 4070's with 8gb of vram start at $800 and going up.
Example Radeon RX 7900XTX Saphire+ with 24gb Vram $1549 NVIDIA RTX 4080 Super OC 16gb $1788
It's literally like choosing the Blue and Red pill
Blue Pill journey through the world of AMD with more budget friendly GPU'S
Or
Red Pill endures premium branding price with the Ray tracing ability that amd doesn't have
FroYoSwaggins@reddit
I bought an AMD processor 2 years ago, completely forgot about it until this post. It’s worked perfectly, I haven’t missed anything. They are underrated.
Embarrassed-Pie-5470@reddit
NVIDIA is better at Ray Tracing and their upscaler is a generation or two ahead of FSR in terms of quality. FSR 3.1 is pretty good, don't get me wrong, but it's a night and day difference.
AMD has more VRAM + raster performance for the price. They have more driver level features, and while most of them aren't anything to write home about, AFMF 2 is genuinely pretty good and a solid way to bump up frames. Having used both, FSR frame gen also feels better and usually gives you more performance.
The main advantages NVIDIA has, then, is that they have a better upscaler and better RT performance. New titles also tend to launch with a bias towards optimizing NVIDIA gpus, and AMD sometimes takes some time to release their game ready drivers (see: Helldivers 2 and Space Marine 2). As long as you're getting a good deal, though, I don't think there's really a wrong side to pick (maybe Intel, actually).
Difficult_Pirate_782@reddit
You are just not cool if you doNt buy the Nvidia GPU.
Axyliis@reddit
Picking an AMD cpu you aren’t missing out on anything Intel offers in terms of gaming, as others have elaborated on GPU Nvidia is like cream of the crop but they charge like it also. I don’t think it really matters at the end of the day as long as you’re happy with the performance.
daveeBruh@reddit
1250, is it the whole pc? I got my 7800xt for 400 and my 7600 for like 180
Expensive_Bottle_770@reddit
It will play games and generally well, which is ultimately what matters. It is definitely not bad at all, value wise it’s pretty good.
That said, there are obvious advantages to Nvidia cards. Whether or not you’re missing out depends on if they’re applicable to you, which is something you need to research before you buy.
• If you stream, Nvidia is the better choice generally. But AMD is still good, so it’s not a bad choice either.
• If you like high graphics, single player type games Nvidia’s feature set is a lot better (Better RT, DLSS, DLAA, DLDSR, RTX HDR, DLSS 3).
• Nvidia Reflex is also the best anti-lag solution for competitive gaming, and some high end e-sports monitors require an Nvidia GPU for their BFI tech (ELMB2 and the upcoming G-sync Pulsar monitors).
• If you’re into HDR gaming, Nvidia is the better choice (RTX HDR + monitors display a more accurate HDR image via the g-sync pipeline on average).
• Anything to do with AI, 3D modelling and Adobe software Nvidia has a huge advantage in both performance and stability (especially the first 2).
This list is not to force you into FOMO, but rather you asked so I’m just listing scenarios where they’re a better choice as you asked for Nvidia specifically. Contrary to what people are telling you, they don’t charge more for “just RT and DLSS”.
If these don’t really apply to you and the price difference was noticeable, then you have nothing to worry about, you made the better choice. Enjoy more VRAM and FPS/dollar.
videoismylife@reddit
Thank you for the summary, it's extremely helpful.
I have a 6900 XT and I'll admit I drool over the 4090's performance; I'll also admit I harbor a little envy regarding DLSS Quality mode. That said I don't bother with any of the other things you mention - so I really have no sound reason to move to Nvidia at this point. I'm getting eye-candy level performance and the card stays almost silent, what else do I need?
As for "driver instability" and everything else that I hear AMD is so bad at, I haven't had any of those issues while owning 4 AMD GPUs in the last 15 years; not that my n=1 means anything.
major_bot@reddit
Here's my n=2. Back in the day I just used to format my entire pc and clean install all drivers when getting a hw upgrade (just had more time then). Nowadays I just use DDU and I never have had any issues with the drivers.
rory888@reddit
*upfront dollar. going back to energy efficiency , the total cost of ownership may be worse depending on local gpu and energy market prices
Yellow_Bee@reddit
Also, for other non gaming applications, RTX Brodcast and RTX Video are nice-to-haves. Video game drivers are usually more stable and readily available on Nvidia's cards.
Kommunist_Pig@reddit
I have an RTX 3080 and I regret not going the AMD route.
If I could review it , I would say : Hot garbage.
WOWMelted@reddit
Honestly I have a 4070 FE and I’d much rather have a 7800 XT.
Jaybonaut@reddit
Ryzen chips are as good as most people say they are. Their CPUs are great. GPU? ask someone else, I need NVENC. Source: have used 4 Ryzen CPUs already - used to always have Intel before that (except for one Athlon way back in the day; been building since the 90's.)
JonWood007@reddit
Eh at your price range it's fine. Dlss is slightly nicer than fsr and Ray tracing is better on nvidia but at your price range I'd still go amd.
green_meme@reddit
Rtx cards have better ray tracing and much better for ai. Unless you work w/ ai you’re good
tap_water11@reddit
I just purchased a 6950xt for around 480. It was a toss up between the 6950xt and the 7800xt. I think whether you missed out is based on your preferences. DLSS and Ray tracing are nice for people looking to get a certain experience from their hardware. For me I prefer simplicity, I know the 6950xt can handle most games natively at 2k easily and 4k (with playable fps) without me having to add a bunch of software tweaks on top of it. I say enjoy the 7800xt, you’ll have a blast if you just pop it in and not follow every single d*ck measuring contest that happens online.
Desizeus@reddit
Dude, no
I just built my first PC ever, something I have wanted to do for as long as I can remember. As someone with SEVEREEEEEEERR ADHD, I triple checked EVERY decision. In fact, I ordered the 4060ti and 7700xt one day apart since in a day mu decision over the card changed.
Ended up keeping the 7700xt, ZERO regrets, and this is coming after a month on an Nvidia pre built that I returned because building saved me a lot of money.
My 7700xt plays everything on 1440p crisp, even the recent silent hill 2 which has been a chore even for the most expensive cards. Rasterized performance is very close to the 4070, a card I would have paid $200 more for.
While I might be missing out on Ray Tracing, even the 4070 dips under 60fps for most games at max settings, and that's the most expensive option given out budgets. Plus, I was able to run SH2 somewhat smooth with FSR3Q, Ray Tracing, and AFMF2 frame gen with the occasional hiccup.
All this to say that no, have zero regrets, your card might be the best price to performance card in the new market rn and smokes the likes of the 4070 and trades blows with the super.
Last, while DLSS is better admittedly, you will rarely require it given the sheer power your card possesses for 1440p, and while you may require it in a few years as someone stated, AMD is already working heavy on FSR. And I might get downvoted for this, but FSR isn't all that worse. On some games dlss does look much better like RDR2, but my card natively gives the performance an NVIDIA card in the price range would give with DLSS (eg 4060ti) and in other games like Silent Hill 2, the difference bw FSR and native are next to none (i got screenshots)
Sorry for the essay but yes, do not fret at all, you got a wonderful card and comparison does nothing good.
*this takes me back to my buyers remorse of not getting the 7800xt lel
jforjuicy@reddit
I was having buyers remorse as well because I just bought and built my first pc and opt’d out of 7900xtx for a ti super. What helped me get over that remorse was really just thinking about why I built it and what I wanted it to do.
GladMathematician9@reddit
It depends on resolution and game selection. The vram on 7800XT for that price point (midrange) is very good (have one myself). Performance at native is something you should test. Nvidia does have a slightly better upscaler (not available in all games) whereas FSR is more commonly available, and RT is still not as good on AMD though it carries a performance task, less FPS. I think that is a balanced build 1080P-1440P. 16gb vram for that price point is good, as long as you have enough power to run the game(s) you want at the target resolution, it's a solid GPU.
Mygaffer@reddit
You are literally missing nothing. I have used many Nvidia and AMD GPU's in my life and the two things people talk about Nvidia having an advantage in, upscaling and RT, don't really matter for a lot of users.
First of all it's always better to run native rather than upscaling if you have the performance for it. For people at 4k newer games and select titles may not give great performance with high settings and those might be a good use case for DLSS or FSR. FSR btw, while still not as good as the latest version of DLSS is much improved and very usable. I have a 2560x1440 main monitor and so my 7900XT plays all my games at good settings without the need for upscaling (Cyberpunk with RT enabled is an exception and requires FSR for a decent framerate).
That leads us to RT. While AMD's RT performance still lags behind Nvidia the gap is closing and the 7000 series has a much smaller gap in performance than previous generations. In my experience most of the games that have implemented RT haven't done it in a way where it's transformative to the experience and most have RT settings that run just fine on the current generation of AMD cards.
For me the difference in cost versus the AMD's superior raster performance made it the obvious choice for me this generation.
Lastnv@reddit
I have both a 7800XT and an RTX 3080. I prefer the Radeon by far. The extra VRAM actually helps.
frodan2348@reddit
The biggest downside is not having DLSS.
I had a 3070ti, which only had dlss2 - which was still better than fsr. Then I got a 4070S which has dlss3.5, and it blows dlss2 out of the water, which is better than fsr.
If you play at 1080p, the 7800xt is huge overkill anyways and you wouldn’t want upscaling at that resolution anyways, so you’re missing nothing. At 1440p the 7800xt is a very well suited card, but I imagine it will start to struggle to get 100fps+ on native resolution in new AAA’s in a few years.
The alternative is the 4070 Super, which is a good bit more money. It’s also about 10% faster rt aside, and yes it has less vram, but it’s faster nonetheless - it will always be faster. The regular 4070 is just a horrible value given it’s about 15% slower than the super variant for not much less money.
I think the 4070S and 7800XT are both equally good value tbh. Neither are bad choice, it just depends what your plans are and how much you want to spend.
WizardMoose@reddit
As someone who's stuck with Nvidia for 15 years now. AMD has really stepped up their game. I'm someone who doesn't care much for graphics. Ray Tracing is neat for the games it makes sense for, but for most of the games I play, I don't have it on. I'd rather get performance than have the game look nicer. AMD has become that choice for people like me in the last couple of years. My next card, which I'll buy next year, is definitely going to be an AMD card. Also switching out of Intel to AMD soon :)
Bani_Coe@reddit
I went AMD (7800xt) and have only one instance that I've slightly regretted it, I don't care about raytracing all that much though so that hasn't been a factor.
The one time was when trying to setup a Flux image generator model with ComfyUI. It was way more complicated than it should have been on AMD. But, I was able to do it, so in the end, not too big a deal now that I got it working.
foggiermeadows@reddit
If you're not a video editor/3d modeler, DLSS is really all you're missing out on. But even then some games don't look that different between FSR and DLSS.
At most you're missing out on 10-20 more fps and sharper upscaling but not enough to justify hundreds and hundreds of dollars imo.
With these prices I'm only buying Nvidia used, it's insane.
0nlythebest@reddit
No, u made the right choice. AMD is way better bang for buck if you don't care about Ray tracing.
Dhako091@reddit
It totally depends on what You Will use it. If You just want to play games, You arent missing anything, You Even Made a good Choice.
But for productivity, it only can work if You do things as hobbies. Things like live streaming Will look a Lot worse on AMD than nvidia, and 3d rendering on software like blender is a Lot slower than nvidia cards too. It works, it can make the same things as nvidia, and do them pretty good, but not as good as the greens.
muffinTrees@reddit
You’re good
VoidNinja62@reddit
People barely use FSR properly let alone DLSS.
Most people are like "4k native bro" when they drop big money on a GPU anyway.
I can game in 1080p upscaled to 4k using FSR with my measly RX 6650 XT.
Actually like energy star wise, for 125watts I have no bleeping clue what you all are wasting all that power on but I digress.
Unless you're doing like AI cude core stuff you miss out on nothing.
I've heard that NVIDIA has the best streaming encoding and thats it. Like its a quality issue where AMD no matter how powerful can't match the quality, yet alone the efficiency. But that is on the driver software side.
drugaddictedloser1@reddit
If you actually play games, Nvidia Reflex > Anti lag.
kazuviking@reddit
For streaming AV1 won't beat the super fast and efficient NVENC codec. Even a 7900XTX won't match the speed of a 4060 in NVENC even tho it have hardware AV1 encoding.
keithstonee@reddit
Missing out on your CPU burning out after 5 years
HumbleCurrent8959@reddit
Im also having the same remorse, i was gonna build a pc of the same 7800xt but with a 5700x, its like 300 more (canadian) if i went with an am5 r5 7600 b650 6000nhz 32gb instead of the 5700x b550 3200mhz 32gb
justa-Possibility@reddit
Ok, I've had NVIDIA cards, and DLSS is nice. Now I have an AMD ASROCK RX6750XT CHALLENGER PRO 12GIG GPU, and I absolutely love FSR3. The old FSR and FSR 2 have been replaced with newer tech FSR3.
Also, now the new AMD FluidMotion Frames 2 or AFMF2 is just released with the new drivers. It's waaaaaay better than it was. Not to mention the Smart Access Memory. That's under the Smart Technolgy Tab (most likely, it's grayed out as unavailable). You will need to enable REBAR (ResizeableBar or Smart Access Memory) in your bios, and also, you must enable above 4G decoding. Then it's available.
[If you have any questions, run GPUZ, and it should tell you what you need to enable just look up where the settings are]
What I'm saying is: With all the new technologies, AMD is doing very well. They may be a budget gaming card. But they look and play great.
The 7800xt is an awesome card. In a couple of years, I'm gonna sell my 6750 and buy a 7900 variation, most likely when the prices come down.
Greyconnor@reddit
I am an engineering student and got a 6900xt right before I started using various programs and I massively regret my decision. I have run into compatibility issues with nearly all engineering programs, and I recently started doing some machine learning which AMD cards are useless for. I 100% wish I got the Nvidia cards that was the same price point for a worse gaming performance.
User5281@reddit
nVidia has 3 or 4 advantages over AMD but you definitely pay for it.
nVidia's NVENC > AMD's AMF for transcoding, AMF is awful
nVidia's DLSS > AMD's FSR for upscaling but FSR is pretty good
nVidia's ray tracing > AMD's ray tracing but ray tracing is still a nice to have rather than need to have feature
nVidia is king for compute
AMD's linux support > nVidia's linux support
AMD is better performance/$
overall I'd never say AMD is a mistake, it's just a question of priorities
LexLuthor911@reddit
I have a 4080 and still don’t enable ray tracing, never use dlss either but I’m only playing in 1440p so hitting 120+ fps is easy
DietQuark@reddit
Decent I think.
Once you have this. Keep in mind it's cheaper to do some in place upgrades.
AM5 will be supported until 2027 I think.
Same goes for the gpu of course.
Diamonhowl@reddit
Everyone hates RT until they try it. Just look at cyberpunk path Tracing optimization mod it has over 100k downloads and the VAST majority of complainers there are using AMD cards. Tried it, it's buggy. 40 series cards actually runs better without the mod because ray reconstruction.
Or the daily "I turn RT on and now game won't open" posts on steamdeck forums.
And DLSS is legit. No youtube comparison video does it justice. FSR actually looks like a scam when side by side in person.
TLDR: Yes, you are missing out. That goes without saying when buying radeon.
Tof12345@reddit
AMD for CPU, Nvidia for GPU.
Crazy_Rick@reddit
The OP spend $1250 for his current setup, which i think is the western EU market. Your setup would cost $1500-1800 here. But i do agree its the minimum to have a "great" pc haha.
Tof12345@reddit
I didn't mean for my comment to be build recommendation for OP,.it was moreso a comment about the "perfect gaming build" in 2024. I should have worded it correctly tbh.
But even so, for an additional 250-300 bucks, his gaming experience will be so much better.
Crazy_Rick@reddit
Yea I know, I should have said for people looking to build a pc that are reading now. I happen to have bought a 7800x3d after i saw the price go up, because i saved up and thought i would have it by then.
Its just that when i see 7800x3d and budget in the same sentence it triggers me a little bit haha. But besides that an x3d cpu with an nvidia card would be my recommendation as well :).
Violins77@reddit
In terms of feature, you are not missing much. It's just that Nvidia's feature are usually just better implemented or perform better (DLDSR, DLSS, RTX HDR, RTX Core, etc).
shrekisloveAO@reddit
I have a 13600kf and a 6800XT, play on 4k (with some compromise ofc but otherwise high-ish fps, more than 100), so no, 7800XT will be a beast of a card and will have you set for a good amount of time so long as you don't care about fancy words such as raytracing or dlss
VRAM go BRRRRRRRRRRRR
schlammsuhler@reddit
You miss out on AI. Nothing else
Hamburgerfatso@reddit
Lol do ur games run at good fps and look good at your native res? If so then you're over thinking.
Anxious_Scar_3544@reddit
Technically speaking? Yes.
I value DLSS and FG way more than RT, and even there I had problems with drivers when I had a 6900xt.
Onestly AMD card are good only if u care about raster, or accept an inferior upscaling+FG.
And I'm talking as a 4090 buyer.
Unless you really can't afford a Nvidia card, I would spend the extra money considering how many years will a GPU last.
And for me, AMD, was a big ass buyer remorse.
Vrumnis@reddit
If you go to AMDHelp sub, you see all these posts about their driver issues. It’s nuts.
searchableusername@reddit
a tech support subreddit has posts about tech issues? crazy
Ruthlessrabbd@reddit
Support megathreads are 100% the worst because the people who have answers or experience often don't visit them LOL, I'm not arguing about the GPUs btw, just spreading my disdain for megathreads
LoliconYaro@reddit
Eh wait, Nvidia doesn't have support sub reddit?
Anxious_Scar_3544@reddit
i know, unfortunately; but in reality when your market share is so low and your competitor's financial capacity is on another level it is obvious that there are differences
searchableusername@reddit
fsr upscaling is worse.. most users don't know or care fsr, but yes, dlss is impressive.
fsr fg, though, is basically on par with dlss fg; sometimes worse, sometimes better. which is also impressive, especially given that it doesn't just run on amd's latest gen cards.
Anxious_Scar_3544@reddit
I don't believe much in those who say it doesn't interest them, since sooner or later it will have to be used since the cards will age.
And I would like to see how many people use it when available (data in hand, not echo-chamber of the internet).
you can call it impressive as much as you want, but one is clearly superior in image reconstruction, especially when you are below the starting 4K.
The thing I hate most about AMD "champions" is their bigotry.
They believe they are buying graphics cards that are superior to Nvidia ones, getting more value out of them.
the only reason AMD graphics cards cost less is because they are inferior in terms of performance in different tasks; you pay less because you get less.
you don't need a degree in economics to understand that if AMD could compete with Nvidia they would have the same prices.
Does this mean that buying AMD is wrong? No.
But too many people recommend them without showing the other party the trade-off, which for some can be accepted, for others not.
Since the difference is not only in RT ON vs OFF, but mainly on Upscaling and FG
HondaWhat@reddit
DLSS is definitely ahead of FSR but I can’t imagine you’ll be disappointed with that set unless your aim is for 4k. 1440p will play fantastically on that.
alinzalau@reddit
Having a 4090 i never used dlss or RT. Didn’t like either of them. It adds input lag. I will always prefer raw performance. In SP games i can see dlss but its fake. For me its making the devs lazy and not optimizing games because AI now does everything. Fuck them. You didn’t miss out at all. Next build im amd if they have a top dog card by the
theefle@reddit
1) there are games that will bottleneck on a 7500f
2) Nvidia isn't exactly beloved on reddit, but objectively speaking they have superior software. Better upscaling, better raytracing, frame generation. To be blunt the reason AMD is cheaper is that demanding modern games run worse and/or look worse.
f1rstx@reddit
If i were you - i’d swap 7800XT for 4070Super, it is much faster in modern games and trend will continue, unlike amd fanboys are saying here. More and more games coming with RT by default and AMD cards performing poorly in those games (7900XTX struggling to outperform even 4070Ti 12gb or having same fps as 4070Super in recently released Silent Hill 2). Also i dunno what people are smoking who saying you will not use FSR with 7800XT - yes you will, almost in every new game. So yea, i will be downvoted again, but you should return 7800XT, add a bit more money and get 4070Super it will outlive RX7000 analogs despite having less VRAM.
Sad_Ingenuity2145@reddit
Aging like fine wine?
It’s the current generation. You can’t speak at all to its longevity.
The one with more BRAM is more future proof.
TransientSpark23@reddit
If a 40 series card can fit the demands of path tracing and FG in its vram comfortably, where do you think further requirements will come from in the next 2-3 years?
I don’t see vram requirements going up again until well into the next console generation.
Sad_Ingenuity2145@reddit
Those features aren’t functions of memory, which makes your question just kind of not make any sense.
TransientSpark23@reddit
This is hilarious nonsense. Not surprised you retreated to a vague ‘more is better’ argument.
I ask again, what do you think will change in games to increase vram needs?
Sad_Ingenuity2145@reddit
Predictable increasingly higher requirements.
Evidence: all of history
Counterpoints: nvidia magic
TransientSpark23@reddit
You’re the one caught up in fanboism here.
It’s so obvious that requirements rise that it’s facile to mention it.
VRAM increases tend to come in steps though compared to other aspects. That’s why I could stay on a 3.5gb (just to head you off there!) gtx 970 for years as I gradually had to drop settings.
Sad_Ingenuity2145@reddit
Are you sure?
I’m not the one denying common sense and swearing less is more.
You’re hopelessly brainwashed by marketing.
TransientSpark23@reddit
Yes thank you, I’m sure.
Your ‘common sense’ is superficial, and I think I’ve shown that.
I won’t reply again as I’m getting Dunning-Kruger vibes from you.
Sad_Ingenuity2145@reddit
People like you are why I never identify myself as a “gamer” lol.
f1rstx@reddit
Yea, it’s running everything fine. RDNA3 on the other hand… oof what a letdown
Sad_Ingenuity2145@reddit
“Oof what a let down” is something you’ve heard a lot in your life.
f1rstx@reddit
Oh, fanboy is mad someone not liking their billion dollar company and going for personal attacks. Pity.
Sad_Ingenuity2145@reddit
Just poking fun at your hilarious usage of “aging like fine wine” to describe a new product in its production lifecycle…while being a toxic (and hypocritical!) fanboy.
f1rstx@reddit
Hypocrisy, what hypocrisy? I’m not a fanboy, i just enjoy good tech and RX7000 is awful compared to RTX4000. Sales kinda show it as well, noone buying those cards. Its rly sad how many people being misled here by “muh vram and raster futureproofing, buy amd card” fanboy crowd
Sad_Ingenuity2145@reddit
Fanboy in denial lol
TrainerCeph@reddit
Been using a 7800x3d and 7900xtx and have had no issues. Unless you really care that much about Ray Tracing and DLSS, its not that much different. (Ray Tracing still works really well)
willwm24@reddit
Nvidia is much easier to use for AI stuff if that matters to you
rhguinn@reddit
DLSR 2 and 3
Elitefuture@reddit
Compare it to the similarly priced 4060 ti.
You're not even missing out on raytracing performance...
The 7800xt is faster at rt than the 4060 ti.
https://www.lttlabs.com/articles/gpu/asus-dual-nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-ti-oc-16gb
So you get 40% more performance in most games, a bit more performance in rt, and more support later on since nvidia doesn't like giving new features to old cards.
Is it worth losing all that to gain current dlss? The new fsr made with sony looks promising.
infralime@reddit
You’re missing out on having your 14700k crash frequently, ask me how I know
TechKnyght@reddit
I have a 3080ti I never turn on RT, it’s not worth playing at 30 fps. AMD is a fine choice.
Lion12341@reddit
Your build is great. Don't worry about it lol
Juusto3_3@reddit
AMD is mainly worse with upscaling and ray tracing. Personally I would've gone Nvidia if you're buying a high end card but then again your graphics card was probably cheaper than the Nvidia equivalent. Don't worry about it too much.
hadtobethetacos@reddit
i mean, yea. You wont get DLSS, or RTX, but thats not everything.
Thelgow@reddit
Always anecdotal, but AMD gpus have been headaches for me. Always the software and drivers. Id rather pay more to get nvidia, who thus far for me, has not given me problems.
BluDYT@reddit
Enjoy your PC. You have one that is better than most people now. Nothing to be remorseful for as that's a pretty solid price.
kretsstdr@reddit
I will be downvoted af but just get an nvidia card, i see no value in an amd card at this point
Dlss and frame gen are the best in the market and are way superior, plus reflex and so to reduce latency.
Rtx hdr is the best windows hdr feature it can be better than native hdr if you have an olee monitor its a no brainer even work on old games
Ray tracing is better
Many content creation and video editing features.
number8888@reddit
What Nvidia GPU can you get for the same price point? Probably shouldn’t get anything less than a 4070.
Any-Kaleidoscope7681@reddit
I go the AMD route every time, because they've always been the king of Performance Achieved per Dollar Spent.
brandon0809@reddit
Only gaining but I’d high recommend Navi 31 if possible
Separate_Court_7820@reddit
I think you got a great value to performance ratio. You should have no remorse. Game On
Forrestgladbrook@reddit
Dude I’ve got basically the same set up, just the Ryzen 7600. It’s great at 1440p. You paid more than I, but I’m in the US and could maybe build that for around $1100 depending on other parts of the build.
Should last you many happy years. Don’t look back. I’ve never wished I could have ray tracing.
Pyreknight@reddit
You're good. For that price and location, you've got a solid machine. Solid upgrade path. AMD supports their stuff long term.
Slight_Antelope3099@reddit
As long as u don’t do machine learning and is way better in this price range
Rune_Pickaxe@reddit
Have a go with fluid motion frames 2. I found it to be really good for a lot of games.
McGundulf@reddit
Sadly, yes. Amd isn't bad. If you are in it for the vfm, then it's the better option. But you are definitely losing out. It's not just about ray tracing (which is amazing no matter how much people like to pretend it's meh). DLSS is not just a single feature. There are so many different ways in which you can tweak your games with Nvidia software. DLSS quality, DLSS performance, DLSS ultra performance, frame generation, ray reconstruction, better in ray tracing and path tracing, Nvidia reflex, shadowplay, DLAA, DSR, DLDSR etc.
So many things to boost your gaming experience. People pretend it's just DLSS vs fsr which just isn't the case at all. An Nvidia card would give you more headroom to enjoy newer games at higher fps for a longer period of time. Raster is good and all, but with how poorly optimized games are you are not in much luck with an amd card.
There's a reason why Nvidia can price their products like they do and people still buy them. It's because they are the best. And much to our dismay, it's not looking good in terms of competition. Amd needs to get their shit together. Intel too.
Competition is great. Just look at the current CPU market. Neck to neck for now. That means good prices for us. I have a feeling that if amd fumbles with arrow lake, the 9800x3d will be largely unaffordable.
jepperc@reddit
Fine. Enable PBO on that 7500f for max performance👍
LoliconYaro@reddit
It all depend on what price you get that 7800xt and the nearest Nvidia card available at your market, for anything below $100 you may have a case for buyer remorse, as at this tier, RT and dlss starting to become feasible, if it's beyond that then you're making a good decision and just enjoy your system
Individual-Most-342@reddit
No not at all, unless you are using rendering or encoding. AMD is just as good as Nvidia when gaming for the most apart unless you are looking for the best of the best at which the 4090 does do a better job than a 7900XT.
fendelianer@reddit
Ray tracing is only really worth it in a handful of games. It’s not worth it in 90% of games and I keep it off (I have a 4070).
For me it’s DLSS. There’s no way around it. It’s just that good. If you feel like games have crappy antialiasing or feel too blurry or whatever, it might be something to consider.
DLSS FG was also a surprise, but not as essential as classic DLSS.
In short, consider it for the aliasing / upscaling quality. If you don’t have issues with that in your current setup, then just enjoy your build.
Apprehensive-Sea-876@reddit
Issue is 1250$ including everything meaning both case(ram,ssd, mobo,...), gear (keyboard, mouse, ...), monitor or furniture (gaming chair,...).
What is those spec. And how on earth can we know if that is a decent pickup. You don't even state where you're from? I see regional price = msrp + 100-300$ for a gpu.
x3pd4@reddit (OP)
Just the CPU Unit.
750w Antec PSU Gold rated 32gb DDR5 KLEVV CRAS 1 TB ssd KLEVV CRAS Random decent air cooler thats b650m gigabyte gaming plus wifi
Idk whatelse i left out
SunnySoft99@reddit
Your setup is great. Ram should be enough for standard uses, gpu good (though 7900 gre might have been better choice), and cpu is a price/performance mvp. You can always sell used parts and upgrade, besides moores law is not as active as it used to be, so you dont have to worry about obsolete components that much, unlike unoptimized games.
There is video of a guy comparing 7600 to 7800 3d, in plenty of games, the difference in QHD is negligible, for double the price.
SunnySoft99@reddit
Maybe also buy ssd cooler, so that you avert thermal throttling and aging of your ssd.
Distinct-Race-2471@reddit
That's not actually necessary. Come on.
x3pd4@reddit (OP)
Didnt know that was a thing. Will look into it thanks.
BigSmackisBack@reddit
Yes its on the expensive side but not so much that you need to be going crazy about it.
Just stop looking at pricing and enjoy your games and stuff.
FreedFromTyranny@reddit
A chair is not a part of a PC build lmfao
brenobnfm@reddit
Yes you are, DLSS is on a different level entirely.
kakumahu@reddit
Personally for me, losing rtx voice for me would suck cause i hate having to pay for noise suppression on my mic by paying for subscription. I also use rtx voice a lot for work cause i get on a lot of meetings
speedballandcrack@reddit
For gaming There are so many QOL and other superior features in an nvidia card like, RT, ray reconstruction, reflex + gsync setup, DLAA, DLSS, launchday gameready drivers, games targetting nvidia feature set. But if you have not been spoiled by any of it, the AMD card will be fine for gaming.
I stress the word "gaming" because in other you would be dumb to not get nvidia.
Distinct-Race-2471@reddit
The big issue is that everyone else do Ray Tracing better than AMD. Eventually, you will see some screenshots or videos of certain games looking insane, and you will be sad your card isn't up to the task... Still for FPS they are an amazing value. It can run anything really. 7800xt was less than $450 US.
Dimo145@reddit
Here's the thing, your combo is fine. Just be happy using it. Reality is that indeed you might not have some of the "cool nvidia features" but it's still fine lol. Personally i wouldnt get amd over nvidia unless for bellow 4070 level, but it doesn't take away that they are still perfectly capable cards.
Crytaz@reddit
Can you play the games you like? If so at this point why waste time wondering what ifs and just enjoy the card?
_mrald@reddit
Do you plan on doing any 3d modelling or video editing in the future?
Get NVIDIA now. Else, AMD is better for a lower price.
Pay more for more features, pay less of you just want to play games.
GonstroCZ@reddit
This is a goos build, dont worry, you are not missing literylly anything by not going with intel CPU and speaking about GPU, you are missing better RT in AAA games
MakimaGOAT@reddit
If you’re just pure gaming and don’t care about Raytracing, then you’d be 99% fine and have a good combo on your hands.
Comprehensive-Task18@reddit
Upgrade the CPU later. Everything else good