#7900xtxGang running mine with a 5800x non-3d at 3440x1440 and I'm getting very similar results. I've been considering upgrading to Zen 5, but can't justify it because this chip still kicks ass. Great video as always. I'm so glad someone is finally making content in the ultrawide space.
If you’re on a 5000 series CPU I’m not sure, you'll see too much of an improvement upgrading to any CPU. I would base your platform upgrade on other features or until you get your next GPU upgrade.
Im on a 5800x as well, but i'm looking to upgrade to 7900xt or maybe 7800xt depending on price performance. I'm on a 6600XT because it was the only option during the pandemic. Just bought a dell 34 inch 3440x1440 monitor and am seeing to upgrade the GPU coming months as well. Considering I do plan to upgrade my complete system by the end of 2026, I do contemplate going for the 7800XT route instead of the 7900XT, not sure yet though.
@@JustSomeDude31 If you're on the fence about the 7900XT and like the $300 the 7800 XT is alleged to be worse than the 4070 Ti/7900 XT to the tune of like 15% despite being just above half as expensive.
@@ALmaN11223344 That's what I've heard as well. Thant's why I'm considering the 7800XT instead of the 7900XT. I'm just waiting to see the real pricing when they hit the market, plus I wanna see some comparrison benchmarks (reviews) first. October will be the time I'll upgrade most likely. 16GB VRAM is the lowest I wanna go. Otherwise I maybe even would consider the 4070Ti if it dropped in price a bit.
Great video as I am trying to decide between a 7900x 4090 build at $4000 vs a 7800X3D 7900 XTX build at $2800 gaming on a 3440x1440 monitor and you really helped my decision in saving the money
I'm glad my video was so useful. At that resolution unless you're one of those people that has to play cyberpunk on its experimental path tracing mode. Then the 7900XTX is the clear favorite.
4090 beats the 7900XTX in every metric. So yes, It's probably worth the extra $600. It's not even the same class of GPU. 7900XTX is 4080 level of performance, which is only $200 more expensive. If you turn Raytracing on 7900XTX is 4070ti level of performance, and the 4070ti is $200 cheaper than the 7900XTX.
In a poll nearly 40% of my viewers ship said they didn't care about Ray Tracing at all so this comparison to see which of these cards is going to provide the raster performance you need, with out vastly over charging is a needed comparison. If your a RT lover then your obviously goign to lean the Nvidia way but if it doesn't impress you like it seems to for many the XTX is going to give you all the performance you need in almost evey situation.
@@ultrawidetechchannel your 5800X3D is bottlenecking that 4090 at 3440x1440 and 3840x1600 at least, possibly higher resolutions aswell. You need a 13900K or 7800X3D to fully utilize the 4090. It blows away the 7900XTX is every game by a decent margin
It wasn't data I had collected for both cards at the time I put this together. You can check out this video ua-cam.com/video/aDEkHVfVABc/v-deo.html if you want to see the 4090 being the only card capable of pathtracing out of all the current gen cards over $500.
Congrats to 1K subscribers! I'd go with the RX 7900 XTX. Raytracing might not be the best of the best, but most games don't even use it anyway and for me personally the games which do are nice to play at best.
Thanks, if i had not started this channel that was the card I was angeling to get. as the raster performance is flawless and the ray tracing was good at 3440x1440, and the price was 'right' for what I could afford.
@@ultrawidetechchannel Absolutely. I have a 1600p monitor (LG 38GN950-B), but the card would still be sufficient. I play RPGs most of the time, so I don't even need extremely high refresh rates.
At the end of the day most people try it a few times and then rarely use it. People like to act and feel like they play with all that stuff cranked up 24/7 without any V-Sync. But they don't.
@@ultrawidetechchannel I'd prefer them in one format, so in that way I can quickly imagine if it's useful and then while I listen your analysis think about future new games and old games performance as well.
Thanks fo the catch. Wish I had seen your comment earlier, I must have exported those slides before chaning the lables on my template. I have now blured out the names so there will be less confusion for future viewers. Thanks Again.
they are swapped brand wise and not the right cards. I forgot to update the template before exporting the Cyberpunk slides and didn't go back and re-export after i fixed them for the other games. the labels should be the same as you see in SotTR, Forza, Forspoken and GotG. I have 'fixed' it for future viewers.
I like the video content a lot. I wish you had a key or something so it was easier to see which resolution is being reported on. I listen as oppose to watch a lot of videos so when I DO look at the screen, it's REALLY hard to see which resolution is being talked about.
Each slide has lables for which line is wich card. Though, when so many resolutions are shown on screen at once, they can get quite small, and hard to pick out at a glance, if you arn't familiar with the content format. Thanks for watching.
I'm glad it helped and that's why I like to have the 10 game side by side at the end. So you can really compare if the cards are able to hit the frame rates in all the games you need.
Awesome vid I have a 7900 XTX and was thinking of getting the Samsung Odyssey G9 Oled 5120 x 1440. It’s my first time getting a super ultra wide, can I just turn down the resolution, not use the full length of the screen and will my FPS increase accordingly? 🤔
Yes i know they are not direct competitors but this video is about do you need to be upgrading to the next teir of performance. If you want to see a 7900XTX vs 4080 Comparison you can check this video here ua-cam.com/video/7nZ_yU7lH4g/v-deo.html
@@ultrawidetechchannel its not even same price class why even compare 7900 XTX to a 4090 compare it to a 4080 like it was meant to, like omg 999 dollar card is beaten 1599 dollar card well no shit.
@@escanor-fx3pc The whole point is asking what teh extra performance and cost actually gets you, which he clearly describes isnt really that much of a practical difference moreso than a numbers game. The point being yes its faster and better, but the actual experience is really not too far off. Especially when compared to the price. Its not like you need the 4090 to play these games unless RT is a huge selling point for you.
I Have been debating and for myself I am gonna spend the extra on the 4090. I don't aplay often at above 60fps as I game on my 65" OLED 60hz tv, running above 60fps will give screen tearing and I am more than happy with 60fps locked I get amazing graphics and smooth gameplay. I want the 4090 so I can game at 30-60 fps at 4k for the next 10 years and I believe I will be able too or I will trade up to the 5090/6090
Sometimes having that peace of mind is well worth the extra premium for more performance. Especially if you're someone who doesn't want to be constantly fiddling with their system.
I found out on my 7900xtx that overclocking the Vram to 2700mhz gives a consistant 10% performance gain at high resolution. Since they use slower memory it makes sense, i don't know if the 4090's GDDR6X will get the same uplift since its faster by default. All of this without touching power is pretty good.
My XT takes VRAM OC like a champ and im at 2750(2764) with a 1065UV. 8% extra perf in 3dmark and no extra effect(W) also not touching power slider. Havnt even tried higher settings.
So if you only want lots of memory and a ryzen 7000 cpu and use a ultrawide monitor and just like playing games and only have a budget of $950-$1000 then seems like you're better off getting a 7900XTX over a RTX 4080 since they are in the same league and the RTX is in its own at $1800-$2000 online.
If you're trying to keep your GPU purchased to $1,000, then the 7900 XTX or RTX 4080 (that's on sale)is going to be your only real options because the RTX 4090 is just way more expensive.
I think if you're going to be reviewing ultrawide & super ultrawide resolutions you should really focusing on 120/144fps being the requirement these days. I've had a 49" 5120x1440 monitor for a few years now anything under 120fps is just awful at this size.
I color code the FPS bars so that people who are looking for different levels of performance, can easily identify their desired performance level when looking at one of my graphs. So they can quickly identify cards that are performing up to their standards. For your performance standard you should be looking for the purple bars.
I'd say the 7900XTX would be a great deal for 800$. There are too many aspects where AMD is lacking compared to team green. But I guess most gamers aren't brothered by most of these so they are buying for this price as well. I don't like the pricing for either of these manufacturers in this gen, feels like 4090 is the only product worth buying, but then you have to pray it won't catch fire because of the power connectors. I'm skipping this gen for sure. 😂 Hats off for Intel though since that's the only brand of the "big 3" whose products didn't catch fire or explode in the past 6 months. Weird achievement but looks like we're living in a world right now where we can be thankful for what would be expected after spending our hard earned money on these products.
What ? Gamers are sheeples. They'd buy nvidia even if the performance were reversed. They did it with a lot of good AMD cards in the radeon HD era, without dlss, without RTX. People are clowns, the 3070 outsold the 6800 despite having half the Vram and not being able to sustain good framerates with ray tracing. Also, manufacturers priced the cards accordingly to make them look bad and sell old stock. Jensen made a speech about it 8 month ago. Only the 4090 and 7900xtx are priced where they were intended to be. Replacing old cards at the same price.
@@PyromancerRift Nvidia historically had larger market share, the 3070 released slightly earlier with slightly lower price you have take to this into consideration as well. I doubt most consumers are educated enough on this topic to be able to make a non biased decision according to what they really need, so this probably has to do more with the companies marketing strategy over the value these cards are offering for the price. I owned more AMD cards in the past than Nvidia, but now I would probably buy team green because of the productivity and other aspects I've outlined in my previous comments. VRAM is indeed a scam Nvidia is committing towards their consumers, but it's not enough for me to justify going for AMD, I'd just rather buy an old Nvidia card (like what I did now with the 3090), or wait for next gen.
200 dollars off would do a lot to recommend all products this generation. Which are all pretty poorly priced but it seems GPU companies are always finding some alternative revenue stream allowing them to screw gamers,
I am aware of this workaround but in my estimation 99% of users either won’t know or won’t be tech savvy enough to do it. On the bright side those games were made for the raytracing power of the RTX 2080 so the modern AMD GPUs don't really have a problem runing them.
Recently played through Marvel's Guardians of the Galaxy at 3440x1440 on the Alienware AW3423DW. HDR was nice, the game itself was very disappointing, especially the combat, very tedious and monotonous, the story was okay, nothing really special, the dialogue was NOWHERE (not a pun) near as good as the movies. Raytracing, I was playing on a 6800XT, so not the greatest raytracing GPU, but I could have had raytracing ultra on for the whole game with playable FPS with FSR enabled (used a Nexus mod for FSR 2.1), but the game just didn't look noticeably better, imo, than raster. Pretty much left it off the whole time and didn't feel like I lost a thing. I've been playing lots of games with raytracing (Control, Metro Exodus, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Guardians, Hellblade, etc.) and I haven't been impressed by its implementation yet. HDR is by far the most impressive tech to me currently.
I agree HDR is a more imediatly impressive technology and right now i would take it over RT if it was a choice. If you wan't to be Impressed by RT the only game that I know of that really delivers is Cyberpunk 2077, its the first game where your like oh so this is what every one is talking about. Though at the levels of raytracing you will need to use to get that effect I'm not sure if you frame rates will hold up well enough to stay out of unplayable range. As for GotG I felt the actual cutsceens were well done and some supprisingly emotional beats with Drax's side quest, but the walking around quiping was just way too frequent. I don't need a quip every time Quill scratches his balls.
@@ultrawidetechchannel I agree with you, the Drax part was by far the most emotionally satisfying part, second would be Rocket and the water, third Quill's kid (no spoilers). I haven't played Cyberpunk, but I have heard the RT is really impressive, so I'll definitely defer to your judgment on that. It just hasn't been that impressive in all the other games I've played.
@@justanotherlikeyou Rocket was a good emotional beat too. Cyberpunk just has way more RT features than other gaems and if you ever see the experimental Pathtracing mode it is quite something. I do have a video on it where you can see it vs raster.
You stats are off.. idk what you got going on but i owm both cards amd your a little low on the 7900 on quite a few titles here. Even the slightest OC on the 7900xtx and its beating the 4090 in alot or titles actually and the ones where its not its not its only by a very small amount.
If your results are higher than mine, it may be due to the difference in our CPUs if you have a newer one or an intel one and are only comparing to a smaller selection of games where intel outperforms the amd chips. As far as the 7900XTX beating the 4090 with a slight over clock that seems quite out of line with not only my testing but the testing i have seen from hardware unboxed and gamers nexus. You may be having a serious bottle neck with your 4090. I only know of two titles that the 7900XTX can regularly best the 4090 and that is modern warfare and Starfield.
There's not a video card on this planet that is worth over $250, if it cannot do ray tracing. You can buy a PlayStation 5 for $500 and that's a whole system without Ray tracing
I am curisous as to what metrics you judge weather a card "can do ray traycing", so I can get a ray tracing lovers perspective on what is accptable as far as a cards ability to render X resolution, X frame rate, & what X% of games it can hit the other two metrics.
@@tomsims2299 Is that an average across all games or even if it happens in one game? like the 4090 drops 49% in cyberpunk 2077 at ultra RT settings would that mean its not a raytracing card, or just that it not an Ultra RT card but maybe its a High RT card? Or do you allow for DLSS or FSR to midigate the drop?
A 22% performance difference in the vast majority of games does not warrant a 60% price increase, regardless of whether there is a seldom leveraged technology it handles better. And yes, seldom used is the correct term when all but 3-4 of the games on the Steam top 50 at any point in time will not include the technology. RTX still is not generally relevant for gamers and fps, HDR, and monitor tech (OLED vs IPS vs VA) will have a more significant impact on their experiences by far, that much is quantifiable by the mere fact that the games people actually play typically aren't even RTX enabled.
I agree and disagree. Every new title includes some form of RT, and AMD is indeed heavily lacking in this aspect. I expect new games to start using heavier RT implementations so the current Nvidia cards should age a lot better than the rest, and should offer better frame rates with higher visual fidelity. There is also framegen and better community/productivity aspects in general but that affects gamers less. It's just if you are spending the amount of money these companies are asking for these "high end" cards it's a nice bonus if you can use it for other purposes. DLSS2 is also better than FSR2 for the record most of the time.
#7900xtxGang running mine with a 5800x non-3d at 3440x1440 and I'm getting very similar results. I've been considering upgrading to Zen 5, but can't justify it because this chip still kicks ass. Great video as always. I'm so glad someone is finally making content in the ultrawide space.
If you’re on a 5000 series CPU I’m not sure, you'll see too much of an improvement upgrading to any CPU. I would base your platform upgrade on other features or until you get your next GPU upgrade.
I have the exact same setup as you, cheers to a great AMD based system!
Im on a 5800x as well, but i'm looking to upgrade to 7900xt or maybe 7800xt depending on price performance. I'm on a 6600XT because it was the only option during the pandemic. Just bought a dell 34 inch 3440x1440 monitor and am seeing to upgrade the GPU coming months as well.
Considering I do plan to upgrade my complete system by the end of 2026, I do contemplate going for the 7800XT route instead of the 7900XT, not sure yet though.
@@JustSomeDude31 If you're on the fence about the 7900XT and like the $300 the 7800 XT is alleged to be worse than the 4070 Ti/7900 XT to the tune of like 15% despite being just above half as expensive.
@@ALmaN11223344
That's what I've heard as well. Thant's why I'm considering the 7800XT instead of the 7900XT. I'm just waiting to see the real pricing when they hit the market, plus I wanna see some comparrison benchmarks (reviews) first. October will be the time I'll upgrade most likely. 16GB VRAM is the lowest I wanna go. Otherwise I maybe even would consider the 4070Ti if it dropped in price a bit.
Great video as I am trying to decide between a 7900x 4090 build at $4000 vs a 7800X3D 7900 XTX build at $2800 gaming on a 3440x1440 monitor and you really helped my decision in saving the money
I'm glad my video was so useful. At that resolution unless you're one of those people that has to play cyberpunk on its experimental path tracing mode. Then the 7900XTX is the clear favorite.
4090 beats the 7900XTX in every metric. So yes, It's probably worth the extra $600. It's not even the same class of GPU. 7900XTX is 4080 level of performance, which is only $200 more expensive. If you turn Raytracing on 7900XTX is 4070ti level of performance, and the 4070ti is $200 cheaper than the 7900XTX.
In a poll nearly 40% of my viewers ship said they didn't care about Ray Tracing at all so this comparison to see which of these cards is going to provide the raster performance you need, with out vastly over charging is a needed comparison. If your a RT lover then your obviously goign to lean the Nvidia way but if it doesn't impress you like it seems to for many the XTX is going to give you all the performance you need in almost evey situation.
@@ultrawidetechchannel your 5800X3D is bottlenecking that 4090 at 3440x1440 and 3840x1600 at least, possibly higher resolutions aswell. You need a 13900K or 7800X3D to fully utilize the 4090. It blows away the 7900XTX is every game by a decent margin
Hey thanks. This is exactly what I was looking for! :)
Glad it helped
Why you dont tested pathtracing in CP77?
It wasn't data I had collected for both cards at the time I put this together. You can check out this video ua-cam.com/video/aDEkHVfVABc/v-deo.html if you want to see the 4090 being the only card capable of pathtracing out of all the current gen cards over $500.
Congrats to 1K subscribers!
I'd go with the RX 7900 XTX. Raytracing might not be the best of the best, but most games don't even use it anyway and for me personally the games which do are nice to play at best.
Thanks, if i had not started this channel that was the card I was angeling to get. as the raster performance is flawless and the ray tracing was good at 3440x1440, and the price was 'right' for what I could afford.
@@ultrawidetechchannel Absolutely. I have a 1600p monitor (LG 38GN950-B), but the card would still be sufficient. I play RPGs most of the time, so I don't even need extremely high refresh rates.
Yeah i had a 3080, i was disabling RT all the time because i wanted the smoothness. So i replaced it with a 7900xtx this time around.
At the end of the day most people try it a few times and then rarely use it. People like to act and feel like they play with all that stuff cranked up 24/7 without any V-Sync. But they don't.
As always, great video Scott!
Glad you enjoyed it, do you like the Raster and RT in one format or do you prefer them separate?
@@ultrawidetechchannel I'd prefer them in one format, so in that way I can quickly imagine if it's useful and then while I listen your analysis think about future new games and old games performance as well.
@@KruskProductions Thanks
Your charts are wrong in the Cyberpunk RT tests, says 7900XT vs 4070Ti.
And they are in the wrong place. The AMD cannot be better than the Nvidia on RT nor be compatible with DLSS
I was about to write this exact comment
Thanks fo the catch. Wish I had seen your comment earlier, I must have exported those slides before chaning the lables on my template. I have now blured out the names so there will be less confusion for future viewers. Thanks Again.
they are swapped brand wise and not the right cards. I forgot to update the template before exporting the Cyberpunk slides and didn't go back and re-export after i fixed them for the other games. the labels should be the same as you see in SotTR, Forza, Forspoken and GotG. I have 'fixed' it for future viewers.
Thanks for the catch I have Implimented a Fix.
I like the video content a lot. I wish you had a key or something so it was easier to see which resolution is being reported on. I listen as oppose to watch a lot of videos so when I DO look at the screen, it's REALLY hard to see which resolution is being talked about.
Each slide has lables for which line is wich card. Though, when so many resolutions are shown on screen at once, they can get quite small, and hard to pick out at a glance, if you arn't familiar with the content format. Thanks for watching.
You got a sub from me, just some constructive critisim you need to sort out your audio setup. There is some weird popping/noise when you're talking.
The story changes, just a little, if your screen is 100hz, and you'd like to hit that ;) Thanks for the comparison! Very informative.
I'm glad it helped and that's why I like to have the 10 game side by side at the end. So you can really compare if the cards are able to hit the frame rates in all the games you need.
6:50 is this a typo that's been carried on from a previous video's materials or is it really tested in 16:9?
Sorry that is a typo that carried over in the graphics template
Thanks for what you do!
My pleasure!
Awesome vid
I have a 7900 XTX and was thinking of getting the Samsung Odyssey G9 Oled 5120 x 1440.
It’s my first time getting a super ultra wide, can I just turn down the resolution, not use the full length of the screen and will my FPS increase accordingly? 🤔
If you were to run it at a 3440x1440 resolution then yes you would get all that performance back.
7900 XTX does not compete with the 4090 its meant to compete with the 4080
Yes i know they are not direct competitors but this video is about do you need to be upgrading to the next teir of performance. If you want to see a 7900XTX vs 4080 Comparison you can check this video here ua-cam.com/video/7nZ_yU7lH4g/v-deo.html
@@ultrawidetechchannel its not even same price class why even compare 7900 XTX to a 4090 compare it to a 4080 like it was meant to, like omg 999 dollar card is beaten 1599 dollar card well no shit.
@@escanor-fx3pc The whole point is asking what teh extra performance and cost actually gets you, which he clearly describes isnt really that much of a practical difference moreso than a numbers game. The point being yes its faster and better, but the actual experience is really not too far off. Especially when compared to the price. Its not like you need the 4090 to play these games unless RT is a huge selling point for you.
I Have been debating and for myself I am gonna spend the extra on the 4090. I don't aplay often at above 60fps as I game on my 65" OLED 60hz tv, running above 60fps will give screen tearing and I am more than happy with 60fps locked I get amazing graphics and smooth gameplay. I want the 4090 so I can game at 30-60 fps at 4k for the next 10 years and I believe I will be able too or I will trade up to the 5090/6090
Sometimes having that peace of mind is well worth the extra premium for more performance. Especially if you're someone who doesn't want to be constantly fiddling with their system.
Nice video !! Keep it up
Thanks, will do!
I found out on my 7900xtx that overclocking the Vram to 2700mhz gives a consistant 10% performance gain at high resolution. Since they use slower memory it makes sense, i don't know if the 4090's GDDR6X will get the same uplift since its faster by default. All of this without touching power is pretty good.
That is a very solid result. I haven't done any OC on these cards it seems I never have the time to do all the things i want.
My XT takes VRAM OC like a champ and im at 2750(2764) with a 1065UV. 8% extra perf in 3dmark and no extra effect(W) also not touching power slider. Havnt even tried higher settings.
Driver versions used for the two cards?
minute 22:13 has that information
@@ultrawidetechchannel Thank you!
So if you only want lots of memory and a ryzen 7000 cpu and use a ultrawide monitor and just like playing games and only have a budget of $950-$1000 then seems like you're better off getting a 7900XTX over a RTX 4080 since they are in the same league and the RTX is in its own at $1800-$2000 online.
If you're trying to keep your GPU purchased to $1,000, then the 7900 XTX or RTX 4080 (that's on sale)is going to be your only real options because the RTX 4090 is just way more expensive.
I think if you're going to be reviewing ultrawide & super ultrawide resolutions you should really focusing on 120/144fps being the requirement these days.
I've had a 49" 5120x1440 monitor for a few years now anything under 120fps is just awful at this size.
I color code the FPS bars so that people who are looking for different levels of performance, can easily identify their desired performance level when looking at one of my graphs. So they can quickly identify cards that are performing up to their standards. For your performance standard you should be looking for the purple bars.
I'd say the 7900XTX would be a great deal for 800$. There are too many aspects where AMD is lacking compared to team green. But I guess most gamers aren't brothered by most of these so they are buying for this price as well. I don't like the pricing for either of these manufacturers in this gen, feels like 4090 is the only product worth buying, but then you have to pray it won't catch fire because of the power connectors. I'm skipping this gen for sure. 😂
Hats off for Intel though since that's the only brand of the "big 3" whose products didn't catch fire or explode in the past 6 months. Weird achievement but looks like we're living in a world right now where we can be thankful for what would be expected after spending our hard earned money on these products.
What ? Gamers are sheeples. They'd buy nvidia even if the performance were reversed. They did it with a lot of good AMD cards in the radeon HD era, without dlss, without RTX. People are clowns, the 3070 outsold the 6800 despite having half the Vram and not being able to sustain good framerates with ray tracing.
Also, manufacturers priced the cards accordingly to make them look bad and sell old stock. Jensen made a speech about it 8 month ago. Only the 4090 and 7900xtx are priced where they were intended to be. Replacing old cards at the same price.
@@PyromancerRift Nvidia historically had larger market share, the 3070 released slightly earlier with slightly lower price you have take to this into consideration as well. I doubt most consumers are educated enough on this topic to be able to make a non biased decision according to what they really need, so this probably has to do more with the companies marketing strategy over the value these cards are offering for the price. I owned more AMD cards in the past than Nvidia, but now I would probably buy team green because of the productivity and other aspects I've outlined in my previous comments. VRAM is indeed a scam Nvidia is committing towards their consumers, but it's not enough for me to justify going for AMD, I'd just rather buy an old Nvidia card (like what I did now with the 3090), or wait for next gen.
200 dollars off would do a lot to recommend all products this generation. Which are all pretty poorly priced but it seems GPU companies are always finding some alternative revenue stream allowing them to screw gamers,
BTW Now if a game dose not support FSR then you can force from the driver...I have not tried but the option is there.
I am aware of this workaround but in my estimation 99% of users either won’t know or won’t be tech savvy enough to do it. On the bright side those games were made for the raytracing power of the RTX 2080 so the modern AMD GPUs don't really have a problem runing them.
@@ultrawidetechchannel If a person is not tech savvy enough to lower the in game resolution to use RSR they shouldn't touch a pc.
@@slim420-e8v i think if we actualy used that metric we would decimate the PC industry.
Recently played through Marvel's Guardians of the Galaxy at 3440x1440 on the Alienware AW3423DW. HDR was nice, the game itself was very disappointing, especially the combat, very tedious and monotonous, the story was okay, nothing really special, the dialogue was NOWHERE (not a pun) near as good as the movies. Raytracing, I was playing on a 6800XT, so not the greatest raytracing GPU, but I could have had raytracing ultra on for the whole game with playable FPS with FSR enabled (used a Nexus mod for FSR 2.1), but the game just didn't look noticeably better, imo, than raster. Pretty much left it off the whole time and didn't feel like I lost a thing. I've been playing lots of games with raytracing (Control, Metro Exodus, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Guardians, Hellblade, etc.) and I haven't been impressed by its implementation yet. HDR is by far the most impressive tech to me currently.
I agree HDR is a more imediatly impressive technology and right now i would take it over RT if it was a choice. If you wan't to be Impressed by RT the only game that I know of that really delivers is Cyberpunk 2077, its the first game where your like oh so this is what every one is talking about. Though at the levels of raytracing you will need to use to get that effect I'm not sure if you frame rates will hold up well enough to stay out of unplayable range. As for GotG I felt the actual cutsceens were well done and some supprisingly emotional beats with Drax's side quest, but the walking around quiping was just way too frequent. I don't need a quip every time Quill scratches his balls.
@@ultrawidetechchannel I agree with you, the Drax part was by far the most emotionally satisfying part, second would be Rocket and the water, third Quill's kid (no spoilers). I haven't played Cyberpunk, but I have heard the RT is really impressive, so I'll definitely defer to your judgment on that. It just hasn't been that impressive in all the other games I've played.
@@justanotherlikeyou Rocket was a good emotional beat too. Cyberpunk just has way more RT features than other gaems and if you ever see the experimental Pathtracing mode it is quite something. I do have a video on it where you can see it vs raster.
You stats are off.. idk what you got going on but i owm both cards amd your a little low on the 7900 on quite a few titles here. Even the slightest OC on the 7900xtx and its beating the 4090 in alot or titles actually and the ones where its not its not its only by a very small amount.
If your results are higher than mine, it may be due to the difference in our CPUs if you have a newer one or an intel one and are only comparing to a smaller selection of games where intel outperforms the amd chips. As far as the 7900XTX beating the 4090 with a slight over clock that seems quite out of line with not only my testing but the testing i have seen from hardware unboxed and gamers nexus. You may be having a serious bottle neck with your 4090. I only know of two titles that the 7900XTX can regularly best the 4090 and that is modern warfare and Starfield.
FIRST!!!
It's Ray tracing for me and AMD can't do it
To be fair can't do it in Cyberpunk 2077. Hope fully we will see more games that reach for this level of ray tracing in the future as well.
There's not a video card on this planet that is worth over $250, if it cannot do ray tracing. You can buy a PlayStation 5 for $500 and that's a whole system without Ray tracing
I am curisous as to what metrics you judge weather a card "can do ray traycing", so I can get a ray tracing lovers perspective on what is accptable as far as a cards ability to render X resolution, X frame rate, & what X% of games it can hit the other two metrics.
@@ultrawidetechchannel I'd say if you turn on Ray tracing and the video card drops half on the performance it's not a card that can do ray tracing
@@tomsims2299 Is that an average across all games or even if it happens in one game? like the 4090 drops 49% in cyberpunk 2077 at ultra RT settings would that mean its not a raytracing card, or just that it not an Ultra RT card but maybe its a High RT card? Or do you allow for DLSS or FSR to midigate the drop?
A 22% performance difference in the vast majority of games does not warrant a 60% price increase, regardless of whether there is a seldom leveraged technology it handles better. And yes, seldom used is the correct term when all but 3-4 of the games on the Steam top 50 at any point in time will not include the technology. RTX still is not generally relevant for gamers and fps, HDR, and monitor tech (OLED vs IPS vs VA) will have a more significant impact on their experiences by far, that much is quantifiable by the mere fact that the games people actually play typically aren't even RTX enabled.
I agree and disagree. Every new title includes some form of RT, and AMD is indeed heavily lacking in this aspect. I expect new games to start using heavier RT implementations so the current Nvidia cards should age a lot better than the rest, and should offer better frame rates with higher visual fidelity. There is also framegen and better community/productivity aspects in general but that affects gamers less. It's just if you are spending the amount of money these companies are asking for these "high end" cards it's a nice bonus if you can use it for other purposes. DLSS2 is also better than FSR2 for the record most of the time.