4 ms·
AMD isn't even bad at video games, it's just pytorch that doesn't work so well.
by mathiaspoint 1y ago
AMD isn't even bad at video games, it's just pytorch that doesn't work so well.
- kyrra 1y agoFrame per watt they aren't as good. But they are still decent.
- msgodel 1y agoTCO per FPS is almost certainly cheaper.
- trynumber9 1y agoThey seem to be close? The RX 9070 is the 2nd most efficient graphics card this generation according to TechPowerUp and they also do well when limited to 60Hz, implying their joules per frame isn't bad either. Efficiency: https://tpucdn.com/review/gigabyte-geforce-rtx-5050-gaming-oc/images/energy-efficiency.png https://tpucdn.com/review/gigabyte-geforce-rtx-5050-gaming-o... Vsync power draw: https://tpucdn.com/review/gigabyte-geforce-rtx-5050-gaming-oc/images/power-vsync.png https://tpucdn.com/review/gigabyte-geforce-rtx-5050-gaming-o... The variance within Nvidia's line-up is much larger than the variance between brands, anyway.
- docmars 1y agoThe RX 9070XT goes toe-to-toe with the RTX 4080 in many benchmarks, and costs around 2/3 MSRP. I'd say that's a pretty big win!
- tankenmate 1y agoI run 9070s (non XT) and in combination with under-volting it is very efficient in both joules per frame and joules per token. And in terms of purchase price it was a steal compared to similar class of NVidia cards.
- Mithriil 1y agoDid you read the article? One of the points is that frames are not a good metric anymore for NVIDIA, since they push the idea that gaming NEEDS AI-generated frames and bullies reviewers to include TAA, DLSS and other frame-boosting techs when giving framerates.
- Yeul 1y agoNvidia is objectively better for anyone who is willing to pay 3k or more for a gaming PC AMD even admits that they don't want to compete in the high range. I have no loyalty to any company but there is just nothing out there that beats a 5080.