3 ms·

> and in pure raster perf, they’re dominating the graphics space as well. Wait, is that actually true? The 4090 is superior in raster to the 7900XTX I thought?

• klausa 3y ago
  My understanding is that they're roughly on-par in raster performance, but Nvidia runs circles around AMD when it comes to RT and DLSS stuff.
  • whalesalad 3y ago
    yeah they do, but simply because they were first to market and have game studios using their stuff. ultimately dlss/frame gen is a hack that no one on a high end card would ever use. ray tracing nvidia is king but they got the jump. that will normalize over the next generation or two.
    • nodja 3y ago
      > ultimately dlss/frame gen is a hack that no one on a high end card would ever use. The irony of those technologies is that they shine best on high end cards. If you're on a low end card and say pushing the limit of a game and are upscaling 720p to 1080p, then dlss can't do miracles, there will be tons of defects due how little information about the scene the upscaler has. But if you're on a high end system trying to upscale 1440p to 4k then even not only is the upscaler less likely to make a mistake, it's also much less noticeable. Same with framegen, on a low end system that's getting sub 60fps, the framegen not only adds noticeable input lag, but often makes noticeable defective frames in between, if your system was already pushing above 60 then not only is the input lag much more bearable, the possible defective frames stay on screen for so little that you'd have to be paying attention to it to notice them most of the time. They're still useful for low end systems, they can prolong their lifespan quite a bit for current gen games, but as this tech becomes the norm, developers rely on them to hit performance targets and your card will be outdated just as fast as older cards used to.
    • CuriousCosmic 3y ago
      As much as I wish this was true, a lot of new games require you choose between lower settings or DLSS if you want to maintain 1440p resolution and a decent FPS. This was true last generation with the 3090 (from personal experience) and it is true with this gen as well (based on second hand from my friends with current gen high end cards). You may not be running DLSS with a super high scaling factor but I almost guarantee DLSS or DLAA is going to be on for most games nowadays if you want to keep framerates stable on ultra.
    • godelski 3y ago
      > but simply because they were first to market and have game studios using their stuff. You say this as if momentum isn't one of the most powerful forces in the universe. Many a better technology has gone extinct because a competitor simply had more momentum. It's difficult to catch up and it's difficult to stop. Nvidia also is aware of this and not making mistakes that many others do by sitting back and relaxing. They are doing everything they can to not let AMD even begin to compete, but they are also very aware that hardware is far from the full package. 75% max, but probably less.
    • hackerlight 3y ago
      Frame gen is a hack, but DLSS upscaling isn't a hack, it's excellent. Native raster looks pretty bad compared to it due to aliasing, and FXAA/TAA/MXAA don't work that well compared to DLSS at removing aliasing.
      • SirMaster 3y ago
        I wish I saw it the way others do apparently. For me DLSS looks worse than native. It looks all blurry. Even DLAA looks blurrier than native to me.
    • ThatPlayer 3y ago
      I don't disagree with frame gen, but I think DLSS, FSR (and XeSS) are going to replace traditional anti-aliasing. Especially with older techniques like MSAA not being compatible with newer deferred rendering methods. Even at native resolutions, you still want anti-aliasing. These are simply the current bests at that. Alan Wake 2 will use FSR or DLSS for AA even at native resolutions, with no other AA option. I expect more games will do this in the future.
    • theshackleford 3y ago
      > ultimately dlss/frame gen is a hack that no one on a high end card would ever use. This is completely false.
    • deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
• whalesalad 3y ago
  In my experience it’s virtually identical to the 4090 in gaming, particularly when you consider that a 4090 is 2x the cost. The 4090 will do better, but not substantially. And in lots of games optimized for consoles (PS5 and Xbox are AMD based) the 7900XTX is actually the better card. I play a lot of COD and the 7900XTX outperforms there on framerate.
  • DiabloD3 3y ago
    It's even neck in neck in titles where Nvidia paid the developers to trash the console optimized path (which would have been ported as an identical DX12 path), and write an entirely new, much slower, DX11 path. Why? Because Nvidia's DX12/Vulkan-style path in the driver is absolute trash, while their DX11/OGL4-era path is very well tuned. Nvidia's "advantage" is entirely software, the emperor wears no clothes. With games that Nvidia's money couldn't cripple games, the 7900XTX, the card that both costs less and uses less watts, beats the 4090 in 1080p, 1440p, and 4k targets.
    • cma 3y ago
      > Nvidia's "advantage" is entirely software, the emperor wears no clothes. Have you seen fully realtime path-traced Cyberpunk?
      • DiabloD3 3y ago
        Yep. I gotta give em props, almost looks as good as Control.
  • causality0 3y ago
    It's the edge cases that are the problem. I regret getting a 7900xtx over a 4090 because RDNA3 is godawful at game console emulation. Even the 1070 I replaced runs rings around my 7900xtx when it comes to Switch emulation.
    • whalesalad 3y ago
      I have a hard time believing this. Switch is 720p low quality. Anything should be able to match that. Edge case indeed though - why not just play on an actual switch lol they are like $200
• hackerlight 3y ago
  Not if you adjust for cost. 7900XTX is much better value raster in everything except perhaps raytracing (although even then there are some implementations where 7900XTX is better). Gamers buy 4090 only because DLSS is significantly better than FSR.
  • whalesalad 3y ago
    No one with a 4090 is using dlss. The input latency is noticeable.
    • maximus_prime 3y ago
      You're talking about the frame generation part. Without it, DLSS upscaling introduces no perceivable input lag.
      • beebeepka 3y ago
        It's totally perceivable, though.
    • hackerlight 3y ago
      The superior ML upscaling of DLSS is the why Nvidia dominates the gaming sector. AMD's FSR upscaler introduces noticeable atrefacts and aliasing especially during motion, the tech isn't close.
    • msp26 3y ago
      It's nice for path traced cyberpunk
  • girvo 3y ago
    Better value I absolutely understand. But I thought they were claiming its out and out better/superior? As far as I was aware, the 4090 still edges out the 7900XTX in pure raster in most games, but again I'm not certain on that
    • hackerlight 3y ago