5 ms·
This is another very good release that is also being somewhat bizarrely panned too. Yeah, it's essentially a 7600 16GB/4060 16GB, and that's what people wanted
by paulmd 3y ago
This is another very good release that is also being somewhat bizarrely panned too. Yeah, it's essentially a 7600 16GB/4060 16GB, and that's what people wanted a few months ago, more VRAM. It also opens up a bunch of possibilities for cheap ML (in the same way the 4060 Ti 16GB does).
IMO this pretty well displaces the 4060 8GB and 16GB - it's cheaper (than even the already below-MSRP street prices) on 4060 Ti 8GB, it's way cheaper than the 16GB model. $50 over 7600 MSRP for twice the VRAM is a very fair deal, and street prices will probably float just as much as 7600 street prices have.
Clearance-priced 6700XT is a great deal but 7600/7600XT is ultimately a 6600/6600XT replacement and it's not a knock on the 7600 that it doesn't have the wider memory bus/etc - it is a lower-tier product that is only in the same price tier due to clearance markdowns.
I maintain that people are just mad about the whole last 5 years (since RTX launched) at this point and pretty much just give automatic thumbs-down to anything that isn't an absurdly out-of-band good product. The pandemic shortages and mining boom have embittered a fair number of people to the point I don't think they're coming back to hobby, and instead they sit on social media and complain.
- bryanlarsen 3y agoIt's tough because most of the games being benchmarked by reviewers were designed to work well on 4GB for 1080p and on 8GB high settings. So the extra VRAM doesn't help much for benchmarking. But future games are likely to run better in >8GB simply because the PS5 and XBox Series X have more than 8.
- paulmd 3y agoI agree that you need to optimize for the reasonably forseeable future. You are buying games for the next 5 years, not the last 5 years - although I do weight things towards the frontend, it is better to optimize for the next 3 years and 2 more of relevance than to try to aim for 5 years of relevance or 2 years of worse/3 years of relevance. Generally tail-end relevance is of low value, by the time 5 years are up things have still shifted enough it's time to upgrade anyway, unless you just don't care by that point. I think 8GB is going to continue to be a long-lived target especially at 1080p resolutions (with whatever gains can be squeezed from upscaling etc too - although generally DLSS needs to inference against the full-quality textures etc). Series S has 8GB (of fast-partition ram, the rest is GTX 970 style slow-partition) and even Series X only has 10GB. People also aren't giving enough credit to mesh shaders etc, the GTX 1650 is actually still in the game with 4GB in Alan Wake 2[0], it does make a difference. The "but a 2060 super isn't relevant anymore!" argument relies on the assumption that you're deciding not to turn on upscaling etc. 1650 can run AW2 on lowest-settings 1080p with 4gb with FSR2 and it looks fine, and it'd be even better with RTX/DLSS. 2060 with DLSS can do a console-like experience on AW2 zero problem. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFf8NsOi-HU&t=356s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFf8NsOi-HU&t=356s Consoles have always been a mixed bag. Yeah, they get a lot of specific tweaking and they also have special hardware which helps somewhat. But overall you're working from a (later in the gen) fairly low baseline. 6700 non-XT performance is ok but nothing stellar, and optimization doesn't save that. But honestly what they are good at is removing "paralysis of choice", having too many choices really hurts people and the emotional feeling of having to turn the setting onto lowest hurts people, even if that's what the console does itself! It's at least pre-tweaked lowest settings etc (although often worse tech etc - FSR3 is blown away by DLSS 3.5 image quality let alone 4.0 and future iterations which aren't far away). You don't have to think about it, you just say "framerate or quality" and you probably know which you want. That is the problem that people will struggle with. 8GB will still work. It just also will be a Series S level experience, modulo things like mesh shading that occasionally differentiate the consoles (PS5 lacks it iirc, as well as DP4a). And that can still often look fine. Will you get more from spending more? Yes. But it also doesn't take that much - series X is the 6700, series S is like APU territory. A 3080 blows away the series X, etc. But you will have to stomach through moving that slider from "native" to "performance" and the texture quality from "ultra" to "medium". Etc. People have lost touch of the world of yesterday when "can you run crysis" was an actual question and not a meme, slamming every setting to ultra is not a given when you buy an entry-level card, and people also can't handle the fact that $200-300 is now entry-level. Midrange is $500-700, high-end is $800 to "how much have you got". And that's not NVIDIA, that's really just wafer costs. If you want to compare die sizes and MSRPs against 10+ years ago (look up GTX 670/GK104 lol), you have to bear in mind that a given die size might cost 5x what it did back then. And it increases ~30% every node-family since 28nm, more or less. It's gonna go up over time, if you aren't moving up in price you're moving down in product-design-bracket and are going to have to deal with more design compromises to hit those lower price-points in the face of rising costs. It sucks, but nobody has any better ideas - to paraphrase what someone once told me, "the industrial and creative poles of several societies and continents are laser-focused on pushing this backwards, and yet the problems only become more difficult after each success". There is no easy answer, lots of smart people are working at this.