It's not that average people are buying 4060's themselves, they're buying prebuilts with 4060's in them. On top of that, you have to factor in Internet Cafe's.
People always forget that probably 99% of the people in the steam survey didn't build their own pc, didn't consider which parts are in the prebuild they bought and even if they did, they've been exposed to nvidia and intel for years through stickers on laptops and pcs that even if they consider which brand, they take what they know...
Also in some markets AMD cards are almost non-existent. The only optioms are previous or current gen Nvidia cards. Since 4060 Ti is still the most recent card in this price range, people tend to choose it.
Also people with financial issues, if credit is your only way of obtaining a GPU then you're stuck with what a store stocks. In my case it was a 4060 at £299 or a 4060ti for £200 more. picked the 4060 because back in 2018 a 1050 2gb was costing me £200 and that was what i got stuck with for 4-5 years. look at it my way for £100 more than i paid last time i got 4x the ram and can actually play current AAA titles on a pc at medium-high, 1080p-1440p, when before wii emulation lagged and PUBG was so un-playable i gave up on pc,s as a hobby entirely.
I like to think most people respect a good back and forth and have loyalties in moderation. Gotta remember that you’re much more likely to talk if you feel strongly opinionated about a particular subject.
@@comicsanz97isn't too bad for me. His content focuses on just providing his own sentiments about what's happening around the tech world in general. Nothing is wrong with that.
The thing is...your average joe doesn't know or care enough about stuff like that. They see amd and immediately think of bad drivers. They see intel and ask themselves "who tf is that" (talking about the gpu market). So they are left with nvidia. At which point they go "what is my budget?" and purchase the first card they see
Point is most customers want their GPU to be able to do everything... AMDs terrible performance in raytracing etc is a major factor in them not selling to the average joe. You may say RT is not important but it is when you are spending $$$ on a GPU - it's like buying an iPhone that has a camera that shoots in 240p, it's buying a GPU with less features.
even average joe doesn't even watch reviews, he just goes to any store buy whatever highest the GPU he could buy in his budget from nvidia many people still believe that ray tracing is a nvidia specific feature, although irony is that rarely any of the budget cards can't even run on raster properly many people just don't know AMD is a proper well know brand, they just buy what brand they or their friends have heard about it
@@alanx216 your "average joe" for sure does not care about raytracing lmfao... ray tracing only matters to 3D artists (or people who do rendering stuff) and PC enthusiast .... (if you buy low and mid tier (rtx 4050 - 4070) gpus just to use raytracing, you are just screwing yourself here LOL) the only reason people buy nvidia more than AMD is because of branding and marketing... just like apple vs android phones..
@@alanx216 Lol? Ray tracing is in no way as important of a feature as a good camera in a phone, and amd isn't even that bad at raytracing. You'll get lower performance, yes, but it's not like the cards are unable to run most games with RT. Especially when most games that actually utilize it are console games which run on amd hardware anyway. It's more like buying a phone that doesn't have stereo speakers lol
Lots of dealers across small markets kept AMD prices higher than Nvidia on purpose. It was the only way they could sell so outrageously priced GeForce. And they had A LOT of Nvidia cards.
Because AMD is as greedy as Nvidia and price matches them instead of going for the throat even when they have good GPUs. AMD intentionally ignores opportunities to grow it's market share.
@@khlaps if radeon and amd would put those gpus with less money they probably will won and they would sell more, if they just give those card like 150 $ maybe they would win against nvidia but alas that wont happen its a fact
That's true on release date, thing is even after aggresive price cuts, yet people still bought Nvidia, point in case rx6800 is consistently at sub $400, i even can find one right now at $370, yet people still prefer 4060ti 8gb which have worse value.
@@tomthomas3499 this AMD tactic "release overpriced and become competitive via deals/sales" doesn't work outside of US as much. Everything is based on MSRP where I live and cheapest 4060 Ti costs 1450 of our local currency Vs 2000 for cheapest new RX 6800. AMD cards must be 25-30% cheaper from the very start to have a chance - until they achieve feature and power efficiency parity.
Like Hub said, people want AMD to be competitive so that they can buy cheaper Nvidia instead, but in reality even after some aggresive price cuts no one actually buying Radeon, yet we still act surprised whenever Nvidia launched overpriced products, the blame is on us by keep buying their products 😂
@@mohamedrafik9271 better at what ? RT ? I have 50 games in my steam library and only 1 uses RT. It's Minecraft. I'm not going to buy an Nvidia GPU just to get 200fps in Minecraft RT instead of 150 ☠️☠️☠️
yes, but their high end is not "over hyped" as it is usually the best of the best. it's certainly overpriced itself. But you can't overhype something that is the hands down best in the world. that's like saying the russian Tsar Bomba was an overhyped nuclear weapon when it was litterally the biggest nuke ever made and twice as powerful as any thing the USA ever built nuke wise . it was a bomb that was so masive and did so much damage that when the russians tested it they decided to sit down with nato and the US and discuss banning atmospheric tests of nukes. well that's Nvidia's top end. a Tsar Bomba of video cards every generation. you can't overhype that. the issue here is folks buying their low end knowing damn well they are just little m-70 firecrackers compared to the nuclear weapons that the 4080 and 4080 are.
Over priced, yes, overhyped? You're pushing it. There's nothing that comes even close to their top card And even the one below it makes sense to buy for the average joe or even someone who knows about GPUs. Nvidia has been pushing new technologies since forever (physx,HBAO+ etc, FG, DLSS),AMD has only been following, acting like this success isn't "deserved" or comes from nothing is crazy hate
The problem is the fact that most ppl buy prebuild PCs and in the prebuild PCs and i mean the prebuilt ones that you go to the shop and straight up buy them without touching pc builder on the sites or stuff like that , 4060ti is more represented than 7700xt , i can find like 25 variations of prebuild PCs that have 4060ti installed in it while only 5 that have 7700xt and they usually only go with ryzen cpus and not intel. And to be fair , the TDP is also a factor , yeah 7700xt is faster , while drawing 100w more power that means not only your pc draws more power but it also produces more heat , witch can be detrimental in countries with 45C temperatures in the summer cause not only your video card is drawing more power but it also produces more heat witch in terms affect your cooling bill too
I was going to post the same thing. Quite a lot of people just buy prebuilt PCs. Another factor is that Nvidia has CUDA. While it (hopefully) doesn't make anyone buy a 4060, it does make a lot of professional users disregard AMD cards. Every software worth its salt supports it and you are just not getting anything for AMD cards in most cases - there just is no alternative.
Honestly y'all thinking 100W is going to change a whole room's temperature significantly is hilarious. 100W is 0.1 kWh. You need 1.16kWh to add 1°C to 1m³. So if your room is 15m² with 2m of height, that's 30m³. To add 1° to this room you'll need 30 × 1.16 = 34.8kWh. 34.8kWh / 0.1kWh = 348 *hours* to heat up the room by 1 degree. Not taking into account losses. This is also an approximation, and a whole pc is maybe 400-500W of power so obviously it's faster but basically 100W is nothing compared to a whole room. ❤❤❤ Your whole pc would take 34.8/0.5=69.6 *HOURS* to heat up your room by 1°C , *AND WITHOUT TAKING LOSSES INTO ACCOUNT*
Correction: Honestly y'all thinking 100W is going to change a whole room's temperature significantly is hilarious. 100W is 0.1 kWh. You need 0.34Wh to add 1°C to 1m³. So if your room is 15m² with 2m of height, that's 30m³. To add 1° to this room you'll need 30 × 0.34 = 10,2 kWh. 10,2Wh / 0.1kWh = 102 *hours* to heat up the room by 1 degree. Not taking into account losses. This is also an approximation, and a whole pc is maybe 400-500W of power so obviously it's faster but basically 100W is nothing compared to a whole room. ❤❤❤ Your whole pc would take 10,2/0.5=20,4 *HOURS* to heat up your room by 1°C , *AND WITHOUT TAKING LOSSES INTO ACCOUNT* Yeah I admit my mistakes even when defending a brand I like. That's called not being a fanboy.
Its not only about marketing, Nvidia is on the market for decades and they built a strong reputation over the years, while AMD started poorly and built a very negative reputation for a long time before the Ryzen series. And are now trusted regarding the CPU; but not yet regarding the GPU
People don't measure the performance of AMD and Nvidia cards 1 to 1. They take AMD native FPS and put it against Nvidia with DLSS turned ON 100% of the time - FPS.
Reviewers keep emphasizing 1440p, but forget that 1080p is still the most popular resolution. It's not hard to see why it is so popular when you really think about it. 1. A lot of consumers don't know enough, but brand familiarity sways in nvidias favor. 2. Their budget doesn't allow for anything stronger. 3. They might have upgraded from an ancient system, meaning it is a massive improvement for them. 4. The increase in power draw combined with the increase in prices of electricity over the last few years also affects gpu choices. 5. Access to dlss. 6. The games they play might not need anything stronger than that. 7. They play at 1080p to make their system last for as long as possible, this includes tweaking the settings to what they feel is optimal for them. 8. The prebuilt section taking up a sizeable chunk since a lot of people don't know how to build a pc by themselves.
I can relate with the power draw thing. as my bills are high for me, so I opted for amd cpus as they take less power now will upgrade my gpu to rx 560 4gb to rtx 4060ti or rtx 4070 super when my money is saved up. either way both will be a huge upgrade for me. also 1440p gaming is still expensive for me, I am still good for 1080p gaming. 😊 I went from intel i7-7700 to ryzen 7 7700.
As someone who still plays 1080p and want dlss and good ray tracing yeah. As crazy as it may sound for 1080p i am upgrading to a r7 7800x3d and 4070super soon. Might try 1440p but probably will stay at 1080p. Am someone who rather have double the fps instead of looking little bit better.
but again if you game at 1080p DLSS is a pointless feature for you, and AMD still has the better price to performance on all cards from budget to hi-end, non of this comes together.
@@tmsphere A low cost gamer already knows what it means to sacrifice eye candy for playability. How did you even reach a conclusion that dlss is pointless at 1080p?
Personally - I've always owned nvidia Gpu's and intel cpu's. Ran a gtx1060 then 1080ti for 8 years or more and the 1080ti is still used as a 2nd pc today.. Recently built a new pc - Went with 7900 XTX and a 7800x3d after doing a lot of research and could not be happier The performance has been amazing i couldn't care less about raytracing although i have used it with the 7900xtx I think i have had 2 or 3 crashes after many hours of gameplay (500+) and honestly it could have just been game issues . Its never been something i can re-create was just a random crash Hats off to AMD i reckon - More ppl need to give them a go!
If they go out of their way to improve prices for the non-"mainstream" countries (as far as technology consumption goes), more people might be willing to. In my country, AMD prices aren't actually better than Nvidia's. They also have less features, higher power draw (at least compared to the lower-end 40-series), worse resale value, and worse availability. That's a lot of reasons that stack against AMD, and not too many for it.
People don't do their research and keep getting ripped off by Nvidia its crazy... Why pay more for less performance makes no sense but that's the average consumer for ya lmao.
That’s the thing: you did research and built your own PC. NVIDIA (for whatever reason, probably just scale) is hugely over represented in prebuilt systems, and many people won’t do much research but just buy whatever system fits their budget. Name recognition helps. AMD will have a hard time winning market share as long as they can’t get PC vendors to use their GPUs more. Even when AMD does price their GPUs competitively and undercuts NVIDIA, they still get outsold.
If it's about gaming only AMD wins easily, but when it comes to productivity, it's hard not to go Nvidia. My friends don't just game on their PCs, they do editing, 3D design, a 16GB 4060ti isn't as bad of a card when it is on sale. Most people want to buy new and are afraid of buying 2nd hand cards so there are even less options around 400-450 euro.
@@Fronioll9973not the case with the higher end Nvidia GPUs. With amd GPUs u can undervolt and power limit and u can make a card consume 10% less power while having stock or even better than stock performance.
Another thing is availability, it took me MONTHS to find a well priced amd gpu as every store in my country didn't bother to sell them, and who did they just sold it with a very overpriced price. While nividia 4060 was being sold at a very VERY competitive price its crazy
80% of GPU sales are through other companies that install these cards in already finished computers and the user gets a finished computer. How many people are there in this world and how many subscribers does each tech channel that deals in detail with hardware have? Usually around 200-300k but up to 2-3 million max. We here are less than 1% of PC users. What we think is so in this circle. Outside it is totally different. See 1 company that favors AMD graphics over nVidia.
It's quite simple, we gamers are fools, we live in a monopoly, technically an oligopoly, in the CPU and GPU markets and we simply don't care, we are the embodiment of the meme "Don't ask questions just consume product and then get excited for next products", At least finding your channel was something cool in the last few weeks.
Well said. Buy ONLY what you need and save those shiny coins for rainy days (catastrophies in life). Dreams rarely work out but bad times do and often, that's why saving money is important. In good times many people piss money away than bad times come and they are screwed.
It's because of the brainrot market. Nvidia's consumer market is now very similar to apples consumer market. People do 0 research and jump straight to the most popular company, I mean it's the most popular right? So surely its the best, literal Chiwawa's who follow the loudest voice. Then you have people with brains who do a little research because they value their money. It's not like you have to spend hours either, just a few google searches, some reviews on YT and bam. You've most likely found a card that you need.
Yep, entirely this. It's not DLSS, CUDA, etc., because normies don't know what that stuff is. The truth is that Nvidia is the most popular because... Nvidia is the most popular. None of the normie gamers want to explain to their normie gamer friends that they bought something those friends think is second best due to "value".
And even all this for what? being able to run the latest game? I could wait 5 years to play a today's game (in max settings) because that's the bulk of gaming we have today already .we gotta satisfy our needs, not greeds And Nvidia is simply selling us our GREEDS
if that's the case AMD will never gain any market share against intel. AMD come with good CPU and they gain market share against intel. it is the same with GPU.
@@arenzricodexd4409 Do you realise how long it took for AMD to start getting as much market share as intel? Intel still have 65% of share, and that's only on the steam hardest survey, there's an event bigger disparity because of how much intel dominated at the begining.
the average Joe doesn't care about those presentations and lies companies do to promote their products, neither they care to hunt to down graphical downgrades when using upscaling. It's mostly about brand names.
Intel has monopoly on pre built PC's cpus and Nvidia has monopoly on pre built PC's gpus. Thats the reason amd hasnt already have alot of market share. Intel and Nvidia can just bribe suppliers to not sell AMD stuff.
I got an ASUS TUF 7900XTX for £790 which was nearly £300 cheaper for the same model in the 4080 super. If they priced them like that day one, they would be raking the money in.
Something that bothers me a lot are people who buy a lackluster RTX card just because it has DLSS like it's some kind of silver bullet, even if the similarly priced AMD GPU is still faster when using native resolution. Not saying this applies to every price point, but it certainly applies to some.
I only buy for raytracing. What can I do with a 7900XTX when it delivers almost half the fps with RT on in Alan Wake 2 of a 4070 ti super. Went for the 4070 ti super and got a good av1 encoder and DLSS on top. What do I need above 4080 raster power for. Raster is never the bottleneck today. RT is the bottleneck. Buying AMD is the same as pairing a 10 years old 3770k with a 4090. Totally unreasonable. A 7900XTX or any other AMD card has too muchraster power for its RT power. So you're basically wasting die place for stuff that never will be used unless you play old games. But once you turn on rt the raster cores are chilling their ass of waiting for the rt cores to bring more data. Those two need to be balanced and nvidia is a loooooot better at that.
I have a 4060. I got it against most reviewer recommendations. Why? Well, the 4060 in particular is extremely efficient and therefore I had no reason to upgrade my 450 watt power supply saving $50 to $100. It also takes advantage of Nvidia's superior DLSS which allows you to bump resolution up one step with virtually no downside. Last I had one bad experience with an AMD card not running well on one of my older games. I also play a lot of older less demanding games and the added power is just not needed.
It doesn't sttuter 😂 I have it and it doesn't even with rt And btw 7600 XT is just like 5 to 6fps faster in only a few games but in rt it can't even compete . + Dlss ain't like your ass fsr 🤣 It doesn't look blurry it looks like native @@mercurio822
@@lilpain1997 did read and you bought a bad GPU an inferior product, most older games dont have and dont need DLSS. so any argument you have is invalid right there. And AMD have an built into driver solution if you are in need of scaling resolutions among other things, frame gen etc but at this point, DLSS and FSR are pretty useless compared to lossless scaling on steam, its better then all other solutions.
I work at a PC hardware store in Canada called CanadaComputers. Most of the 4060ti's sell in prebuilds because there is no AMD competition for prebuilds. If someone does try to buy a 4060ti I have always convinced that person otherwise. Either get the 4060 or get the 7700xt which has been the same price as the 4060ti for a long time.
cos many game dev only optmized for nvidia.. since they are their sponser, even bungie did 4060ti is actually the real 4060, while 4060 is actually 4050. since they use AD106 and 107 meant for 60 and 50.
That's not been true for over a decade, games are designed with AMD in mind and fully optimised for Ryzen and RDNA because that is what is in consoles. What Nvidia does is pay developers to use their tech for certain graphical options instead of AMD's or some other open standard.
games benchmark videos ive seen tell a very different story. Just bc it has a green logo on it doesnt mean jack shit just as well as if it was a red logo its just the game dev taking money to advertise a GPU for you, it never meant anything.
AMD has the entire console market (short of the switch ) for themselves for over a decade now. And consoles are the things games are optimized and made for. AMD has an unbelievable advantage and still can't compete, it's actually astonishing how incompetent they are.
speak for yourself. the last nvidia gpu i bought was a 1080ti, which is still decent in 2024.... thats 7 years later and it was bought 2nd hand. i got an amd cpu in my rig right now 5600x , bit outdated but not really outdated. still gets the job done.
I Was about to buy a 4070 TI 12 GB of Vram for a total of $934.00 Then before I clicked by now, I asked myself how much crack did I smoke that day? ? ?
when the RTX 4060 was released, i hated not the card but the price. 9 months later, I bought it. I need a card that use less power and is efficient since I'm only running on solar power paired with an AMD Ryzen 5 5600. The RTX 4060Ti though, I can't stomach the price and is literally useless for me.
My reason for sticking with Nvidia is not necessarily drivers but CUDA and TensorRT, if only there was a way to use TensorRT on AMD then i would switch platforms. There's also DLSS and VR performance, I really want to switch to AMD but the 7800xt disappointed me being a minor improvement over 6800xt.
I am wondering if the number is thrown off because there is a lot of 4060ti's in laptops and I remember this happening with the 1060. The steam HW list wouldn't make a distinction between the desktop/laptop version.
It’s simple. CUDA cores. People who also value productivity apps, no matter their opinion on NVIDIA, whether they’re a fanboy or not, they will be pushed towards choosing their GPUs. Because of those cores, which are only exclusive to NVIDIA GPUs, AMD is lagging behind them in terms of performance in productivity.
There are definitely people that go for NVIDIA due too productivity and if you need a graphics card for productivity you can be the biggest AMD fanboy there is and still would have no reason too buy an AMD card but honestly most people that buy graphics cards are casual gamers that dont know what cuda cores are how much VRAM they need for there setup and games or what differences between DLSS and FSR exist, they might not even know what upscaling generally is. Most people are still on 1080p monitors and dont spend 500+ euro or dollars for a graphics card were the current gen cards from nvidia actually become competitive. The reason these people buy Nvidia because its the most popular and they all heard about Raytracing and thats it. My father for example bought a 4060ti because a 4070 was out of his price range, he knows AMD has graphic cards but he did default too buying NVIDIA just because its NVIDIA and he wanted too try Raytracing which the card can barely handle.
@@Fractal_blip Good choice honestly AMD graphic cards just seem way more future proof if you only need them for gaming. I recently bought a new pc and had the choice between the 4070super and 7900gre, went for the 7900gre eventually. My PC's main purpose is Gaming and working but my work only really contains MS Office and some Chat-GPT aside from that some movie streaming and thats it even in this price range AMD was the proper choice for me. The 12gb VRAM a 4070super delivers will sooner or later not be enough considering i use a 3440x1440p monitor. DLSS and Framegen would have been nice but you know once 5000 series releases and they do major updates for DLSS the 4000 series cards will probably be locked out of these features as NVIDIA did the same too 3000 series cards for framegen even though they are capable of using it. AMD FSR recently got a framegen update and even though there are only a handful of games supporting it so far it even works on older RTX cards. Raytracing is also kinda overhyped so far, it was not nearly as visually pleasing for me as i thought it would have been seeing youtube videos but i so far i tested only CP2077, Eldenring and BF2042.
switched from a pre built pc with AMD integrated graphics which i bought in 2021 for £600 to a 4060 prebuilt on sale for £799 original price was £999 going from 30fps on rocket league to 500 on it with a 4060 was huge for me so i think the 4060 was worth it for what i do.
yep integrated graphics have always been pap, just something to put a picture on the screen while you rma the g card you've blown up, or the g card has failed.. it's meant for super basic tasks like surfing the web to get drivers etc.. NOT for gaming, although they prob can run the original Doom at full chat!
AMD is unreliable. A lot of Linux Community praises AMD on linux tell they realized AMD has never reliably offered opencl on Linux while Nvidia has had a stable cuda driver for 10-15 plus years now on Linux. I would have been on Linux day one of dxvk if it wasn't for having an AMD GPU. Nvidia GPUs easily offer dlss, ray tracing and VR in Linux. AMD has plenty of odd ball issues on windows as well. User's don't care about performance or price. They just want everything to boot/launch on they're PC. Same issue with snapdragon x. People just want the hardware to run correctly.
No offense.....nothing enticing about amd except for the price of course.....but this price is justified as amd lack features that nvidia offer....thats all.
not only they insult us but they're trying their hardest to replace you, too. They already got me :( Still buying Nvidia. AMD isn't anywhere near cheap enough to compete in term of image quality/price ratio, just because of DLSS. Nvidia also had better OpenGL and even vulkan support, as well as Blender support (I gave up on blender/art myself, due to AI, but it's still an argument in favor of Nvidia)
They had a nice lineup in RDNA3. RX 7900 even does the ray tracing. Nvidia just gave 4070 more performance, 4070Ti more VRAM and 4080 lower price. Targeting the issues and nailing them. AMD needed 7900GRE to clock faster, 7900XT and 7900XTX to have lower prices. They fixed the GRE too late. 7900XT/XTX are still expensive.
Guys let me tell you the truth: PRICE, most gamers are ok to spend between 300-500 for a GPU but with the current prices ? Noway I'm buying a 4070 at 700-800$
I bought a 4060 Ti 16gb ($430) because it was the best GPU my 450-watt PSU could handle. If I had bought a better value GPU and a new PSU, I would have been getting less value for my money. That's it, clean and simple.
I have a 4060ti 16gb I upgraded on a prebuilt that came with a 1660ti. It was a massive increase in performance. I think it’s a pretty solid card, despite the relentless push to say it’s trash.
@@ganthc but it's trash though. It should have been at least 20% faster to be a true 3060ti successor. Also it shouldn't have been 500$ on launch, 420 at most, with price dropping to 370 after a year.
What is your take on Intel 13th and 14th K SKU CPU blue screen issues ? Do you know 13th and 14th CPU even crashing on W680 chipset workstations ?W680 is workstation chipset , cant overclock , only run in stock memory and stock power profile . Do you know how important game servers is for on line gamers ? Do you know high latency problem on these Intel CPUs ? Have you tried LatencyMon on your Intel PC ?
@@cks5148 There are people dismissing this as user error still and it just baffles me. W680 systems having numerous problems when they usually have very conservative settings is a very bad sign.
The fact is: Nvidia is more stable. I have AMD gpu and I love it. But I used Nvidia too, and Nvidia is far more stable. Also, Nvidia is selling it's gou's for everyone, individuals and corporations, and even small businesses like internet cafe's and game zones. I don't imagine a small business like an internet cafe or a game zone is going to risk buying an AMD, because even if the performance is better, AMD gou's are not plug and play, and are not stable, and they tend to crash way way more than Nvidia. And that's a fact. Some fanboys are going to get mad when they read this, but it's just a fact. A 4060 is a bad value, but its not going to crash when you play at high settings 1080p or 1440p with dlss. But an AMD gpu like 6700XT or 6800XT or one from the 7000s series, is going to crash even if it's giving a better performance and higher fps.
The only few reasons why I like nvidia gpus is because they have a well know naming system. If someone is trying to flex their pc and they say 7900xtx is laughable or incomprehensible compared to if they say 4090. The second reason is the founders gpu's, I love the fact that they are exclusive/limited time and they always look amazing and fit the nvidia brand. The third reason is software, I mean just look at fsr frame gen vs nvidia, it's night and day which is better cuz fsr looks like xbox cloud gaming on horrible internet. If AMD starts implementing the same things I would be very inclined to buy from them, my brother has a 7900xt and he likes it but he said next time he would buy nvidia for video editing and better software.
Nvidia's naming scheme is definitely superior, AMD's naming scheme is almost a fraud talking as someone who's happy with the confusingly named 7900xt. It really took a lot of research to come down to getting this over the 4070ti.
Surrounding also influence your decision. This way Nvidea wins also. The 2nd hand market is good for Nvidea and when that kind of discount is there people are ready to let go AMD and opt Nvidea. For me I am considering 3070ti for 25k when 3070 is at 21k and 3060ti at 19k. 6700xt is for 20k used. We can get new RX 7600 for 25k and 4060 for 27.5k. so I can opt for RX7600 when on offer it drops to 21.5k. So my options are used 3070ti or RX 7600 new with a 12400f with H series mobo for temporary and then change to AM5 with a good GPU in Hand. I will solve this mystery but the option of 3070ti is really logical for meaningfull purchase. The AMD service centre are also in question in India. Intel and Nvidea rule here in India because of there service and availability. Also budget segment products of these 2 are cheaper as compared to AMD except RX6600.
@@ethaneaves_04 a GTX 960 was on par with the last gen flagship for way less then the 650 a 4070super costs, and a 4070super isn't faster than the last gen fastest card either. It's just terrible value. The best card is a 4060 and even that should be about half the price realistically if you look at what tier the card is.
As a Radeon user (RX 7800 XT) the only reason I went with AMD is because of price, 7800 XT was cheaper than 4070 super and better in raster performance than 4070. It's a good rasterization card and has a high vram but that's it. It's ray tracing is unusable in most games without heavy FSR and since I absolutely despise FSR (can't stand the ghosting and shimmering) I can't use ray tracing with native 1440p res. Radeons are basically just newer GTX cards, forget about ray tracing or DLSS on these cards. I tried to delude myself that I don't care about ray tracing or DLSS but I do. They're great features to have. If I had more money I would buy 4070 super. Now I'm stuck with this brick. Buyers remorse is setting in. 😔
Nvidia just has so much (deserved) historical brand recognision at this point that it’s simply the default choice for non-techy gamers. Same reason you’re gonna crash and burn if you try to compete with Sony Playstation, unless you have something extremely good to offer.
AMD is the most basic plug and play software there is for any GPU, its really one of the few places they outdo Nvidia completely is the gaming compatibility and plug & play nature what they lack in features.
One problem is that reviewers always do like for like comparisons, but gamers pretty much always use DLSS, which makes NVidia a much more compelling option than AMD at any price point.
One thing you have to consider is this: different marketplaces will have different prices. Currently, the 4060TI here is going at $560 here in Serbia, the 7600XT is at $510, while the 7600 is at $430 and 3060 is at $320 on cheaper models. It is an absolutely shambolic market and I reckon a lot of markets will vary ( I hear brazil isn't fun for this sorta shite). 4060Ti is a shit proposition in America yes, but in Europe where it goes for almost $200 cheaper than the 7700XT...It may be a good bargain (here it is $200 cheaper than the 7700XT)
For me the choice of Nvidia>AMD is simply because AMD dropped development of Liquid VR and don't work on game Optimizations. Why would I go with the company that has decided to ignore my use case?
Man, as much as I enjoyed my AMD RX 6700 XT, I had to switch to an NVidia 4070 Super for "better" video editing... Still too expensive of a GPU (even though I managed to get it for 440$ second hand). I will gladly switch back to an AMD GPU when they bring some good encoders to the table. Still loving Radeon family.
Just seems to be the way that nvidia is ahead for software, features and overall utility. People who want to save a few dollars and get a few more frames in a game will buy an AMD but overall they are missing out on a full feature set, for instance why would you spend $900 or whatever on a 7900XTX but have terrible performance in RT/PT etc, they will say RT/PT doesn't matter but it definitely does when you spend almost $1000 on a GPU.
@@alanx216 you have some point on RT/PT but usually people buy high end cards for also running at higher resolution, and at 4k, even a 4090 struggles with PT unless you turn on dlss performance and frame gen to get a decent fps.
@@alanx216 and we're in an era where we get frame gen and upscaling to reach high fps, makes much sense because alot of displays are now high hz which feels much better than turning on RT/PT just to dip back to 60fps below
@@paulojamesminimoisaac7858 Put it this way bro buying an AMD is like buying an iPhone with missing features, idk something like the camera only shoots in 240p... I'm not saying AMD cards are bad but for the average joe buying a GPU, they want all the features and it just doesn't make sense to buy something with bad performance when you can get something at a similar price with better overall performance using all features.
Nvidia profile inspector is really good and helps me improve image quality substantially, rtx hdr and hdr and upscaling for UA-cam are a bonus. I am playing on an oled lg c2 42 inch. If AMD improves upscaling, rt and gives hdr software then I will consider switching back to them. There are compromises, no company is perfect.
AMD need better marketing. Also, they should make their naming conventions closer to Nvidia. So average people know which AMD GPU is similar to a specific Nvidia GPU.
@@vvhitevvizard_no, native will never compare to an upscale image. Id rather get a good AMD card and run it on native resolution than get a Nvidia card price equivalent and use an upscaler just to get a shittier image quality.
One of the reasons people by Nvidia over AMD is AMD Fanboys. Some will take one look in this very comment section. See how the AMD supporters are acting. And literally choose Nvidia instead. And before you say people don't do that. People actually do that all the time. Just look at the comment sections of other UA-camrs that cover Nvidia and AMD. And one of them is posting this comment right now.
Nvidia is like Apple in a lot of different ways. Their price to performance is disgustingly bad. I was thinking of buying a new GPU because I've had my current one for little over three years and want to try new games. The problem is that if you want to go for Nvidia you can't get a decent GPU under 700$ unless it's second hand but since I don't like not knowing what someone did with their gpu that checks off. AMD is a beast in my opinion since for around 700$ you can get a brand new 7900 xt which can run most games in 4k and that's what ill be going for. Also I had AMD my whole life starting with the rx 460 to rx 560 and now rx 6600 and I can safely say that I've rarely had any problems with these gpu's. Most people don't understand how they're being scammed by Nvidia to the point that they're paying, in some cases over 2 thousand dollars for a brand new 3090 when there is an AMD graphics card for 70% less that completely wipes the floor with it.
7900xt on sale is a very good price to performance tho still not a budget card, it demolishes anything I throw at it at native 1440p with everything Ultra RT off 120fps+. This card can do one thing well and that's gaming, ppl who buy Nvidia just to play video games are really missing out and paying for Cuda and NVENC they'll never use.
Wrong, I have the $7,900xt. I bought it when it was $900 Plus. Every modern game envelope at 1440p has been at least around 130 FPS give or take. I have also used it while rendering videos at 1440p, hosting a server a private one at that, watching UA-cam with multiple tabs open while talking on Discord. So to sit there and say this card can only do one thing is completely false and shows pure incompetence on what you actually know about it. People actually need to do some research before they spew nonsense. The amount of people in this comment section going AMD bad in the video good just shows how many people stick their head in sand and go la la la.
Im still think that the rx 7900gre is another price to performance legend Like was nvidia gtx 1080ti no joke there cuz you can háve gre IF it is in sale for 500 eur Like damn and 16gb of rám and great performance amazing i hat nvidia gpus allways first was 1050ti later Rtx 2070super after that Rtx 3070 and now rx 7900gre and r7 5800 and im not gonna change back from amd cuz this is amazing gpu and nvidia háve just nothing to offer to me at this point cuz VRAM price and great support of amd really does those new product great Like nvidia really shoukd bé ashamed of them self as company cuz fucking Rtx 4060 is worse than 3060 in many tituls thats just crazy Like People do t want gpu that is power efficient they want power house and Rtx 40 series is anything but power house its more Like brothel cuz its just také your money for moments IF joy but than you realize that in long term this is pretty shit.
@@Azure-hg1rm 60 series is the lowest end nvidia card, do you expect 4090 level ray tracing performance out of it? The fact that 60 series cards beat high end amd cards at ray tracing says a lot.
I have a used 3090 but when buying the card my primary 2 concerns were does it have CUDA and does it have 24gb VRAM. Untill AMD sort out the hot mess that is ROCm then it's not even a competition. So many people on the Llm forums complaining that they got ROCm to work only for it to break a few days later. I really hate that the ONLY choice when buying a GPU at the moment is Nvida but honestly AMD and Intel need to do better.
Why are we asking a question we already know the answer to the AMD Radeon brand is in its last legs it has little to no market share and its mindshare on the basic consumer mind set is practically zilch AMD should know since they had a dead brand with their Athlon and Phenom CPU's/APU's its the reason why they had to rebrand to Ryzen the only issue now is that they only give all their attention to friggen Ryzen after the success of that branding all while Radeon continues to falter which is sad cause Radeon kept them afloat while they got their act together the only reason why SONY and Microsoft used a crappy Bulldoshit CPU on the PS4 and XBOX one was cause AMD could give them a decent GPU along with it at the price they were wiling to pay.
AMD cards definitely are winners in terms of value, but personally I just like my RT and wanna upgrade to 1440p, which is why I'll get a 4070 Super next month, probably the only card in the 40 series lineup that is not dogshit/overpriced. If AMD cards had better or at the very least comparable RT-Performance I would jump ship immediately. Most people tho are just completely green-pilled, won't even do the tiniest amount of research of what they actually need for their pc. (Probably the same people who buy overpriced water coolers for a 65 TDP CPU)
The reason why people keep buying Nvidia hardware in my mind is that those GPUs are a fleshed out investment. They do everything and it's only in recent months that AMD has finally got their hardware suitable for streaming, but that still leaves other features on the table for AMD to fully introduce whilst Nvidia already supports them. If you don't need a bunch of features, AMD is considered the cheaper option, which begs the question-WHY do so many people think that they need these features? AMD RDNA 2 and onward will complete most of these tasks already, it should be about time AMD GPUs should be rising.
Most people don't care about 60 and 80fps, it's the same thing. Most people don't play with a frame counter. Most people who play games, they buy graphics card to play games. Most people don't compare graphics cards. They buy only 1 GPU to play games. If people don't have $700 for 4070, they don't buy 4070 at $700. People who have $400 for a graphics card, they buy a $400 graphics card. I know it's obvious but just letting you know that you don't know **** AMD has stutter and framedrops in the first 10 minutes after you start a game because of s**t drivers and because they don't know how to solve the shaders problem.
How as the vast majority of people need a decent CPU and GPU that they can play games, and have a dozen chrome tabs open, and be fairly priced. The average Joe wants to come home from work and game well at high FPS. RT be damned. You want to sacrifice 50% performance to have shiny windows?
My belief on the reason is that it's the latest generation and you get DLSS 3.5 which is worth a lot for some. And some doesn't put their graphics settings to high or max so the VRAM won't get filled up and their gaming experience is likely fine.
I think this could be summed up into : if you are willing to overpay for a better card buy nvidia but if ur on a tight budget and trying to afford all the parts buy from AMD
RDNA 4 is just gonna be the RDNA 3.5 that the Ryzen 9000 series will be getting? I mean hey, RDNA 3.5 has actually turned out to be a bigger improvement than we thought by itself, so maybe this won't be so bad. I think they're just biding their time for RDNA 5 to pop off the RX 9900XT while the 8800XT covers their back with effeciency.
cause they think need cuda core, raytracing (sure they looks good) but tanking the performance in entry and mid range GPU , they always talk how streaming and editing video is better on Nvidia which is true but how many % people who own NVIDIA actually use it for making money? my oppinion still stand if you want very high end GPU for editing and streaming or doing complicated physics you didn't have a choice get Nvida, but if you using your GPU for gaming, little bit Editing, little bit 3D rendering ,most of the time microsoft office work and watching movie or listening to music just get an AMD, it will serve you well with lower price.
The another thing - some time ago AMD was a pretty good option for number crunching - more raw power and mem for the same or lower price. But as non-gaming gpu market has been growing - amd did nothing and became basically useless in most cases. Nvidia was very much interested in pushing CUDA, far before AI and mining booms. When I studied multithreading computing in general and specific GPU computation (like temperature gradients simulations) at uni - we were learning CUDA. Nvidia was trying to make GPUs something more in gaming with PhysX. DLSS is basically a side product of their bet on tensor computing and NNs. Can't say for sure, but with their tendency to broaden their reach outside of gaming - it is probable that their real time ray tracing in gaming is a side product of trying to reach professional render market. For AMD, on the other hand, Radeon always has been a side hustle. And now, with their success with Ryzen, but still limited resources - it is better for them to focus on CPUs (and, probably, on ARM), where they have a great odds. With GPUs - they are in a much worse place, less chances to get money invested back. It would be great, if they were pushing their GPUs harder. I'm sick of Nvidia providing borderline usable amount of VRAM in gaming GPUs.
AMD GPUs is only good at gaming, their gpu support on 3D software is just a joke... For eg, an RX 580 is still a capable card for rendering but amd don't even bother to add HIP support for these older card. Some 3d software like Blender requires amd gpu with HIP support or you can't use your gpu to do the rendering.
What do you even want to render with RX 580 or it's nvidia equivalent? I recently bought 7900 xtx and run with it things 16Gb 4080 can literally only dream of. I regularly max out all my 24Gb that cost me only $900. It's a steal both for high end gaming and content creation (unless you're building a 24/7 render farm). "but amd don't even bother to add HIP support for these older card" Meanwhile, nvidia 10 series that needs DLSS the most gets blocked too (happens to be RX500 generation counterpart). While FSR can easily run on those 10 series just fine.
Why is this constantly brought up in these discussions? When we're talking about what you need for your individual use cases yes, it's definitely worth considering, but NVidia isn't pulling 80% market share because average Joes are all super into 3D rendering and just never talk about it. We're talking about mass market appeal, 90% of the consumers don't know what CUDA is and most of those that do only know it from that article they saw about how many cores the new card has.
@@ValkisCalmorexactly my guy. Most people will never use CUDA, RT or upscaling. Most people just need to do work, browse the web and maybe game here and there.
AMD is a boring company who only makes good CPUs but everything else is yesterday's news. Nvidia is pioneering (if what they're pioneering is shit - then why does AMD follow every footstep?) and people at least get excited a tiny bit when buying Nvidia. And ofc there's fact that Nvidia is more stable and works better with professional software like 3d renderers. So basically pros and people who have no clue buy Nvidia, and only geeks buy AMD. Still, I'm gonna be buying Arc.
The reason why we buy Nvidia and will always buy nvidia is their drivers. Thats it. all your promotion of AMD means nothing because as soon as someone is gullible enough to waste money on an AMD GPU only to discover that it is broken and they have to spend hours trouble shooting it only to find theres no fix for their game and then they switch to nvidia and its just plug&play without issues and you understand why people would spend 1000$ on a 4060ti before they would buy an AMD card. Benchmarks mean nothing they are just arbitrary numbers on a screen. I need a GPU that functions correctly without issues and I have been burned no less than SIX TIMES by the AMD cards that I have bought over the years. Never again. I dont want to pay 2X or 3X more for a GPU than i have to but My choice is buy a working GPU or a broken GPU.
All this talk about AMD drivers being bad seems horribly outdated too me. I switched too amd end of 2020 with a rx570 8gb i bought of from a friend that has used it for like 3 weeks but found a good offer for a 6000series, i didnt make a conscious decision of switching too amd i just did it cuz he gave me the opportunity and i knew my gtx960 4gb was outdated. I never had a single driver issue with that card, recently bought a whole new rig with a 7900gre threw half my steam catalogue at it and still didnt encounter any issues. Only problem i had with amd was my new am5 based MB having USB issues under high performance games but i managed too fix that within 10mins.
I've brought a lot and advised people to buy Nvidia cards (in the triple figures) over the years. Since my first Geforce 256 DDR, as a system builder for others and my own house hold. Currently running RX580 and RX5700XT with no driver issues. I've watched Nvidia get greedy over of the years. This has played AMD hand to also jack up pricing which is bad for those that buy and use GPU cards.
On Linux, it is the opposite situation where AMD drivers are plug and play on Linux while Nvidia drivers aren't as good(but I have heard that they are improving with the 560 nvidia driver).
1. There is no choice. 2. This new gen of PC gamers have no context on pc pricing in general. 10 Years ago I would have never paid over 200 for high-end RAM, or over 300 for a motherboard. Graphics cards is also just a sin that nvidia continues to commit.
Mostly cheap prebuilt OEM build sales Vex. Probably a price sensitive purchase at the online retail and box stores or a technical and practical issue with system builders/Corporations with cheap bulk lower wattage PSU's. I'm actually surprised about how many people don't care or understand what performance they have in their systems. Marketing is strong with this one. Thanks for your thoughts and analysis Vex! Peace!
ok, then how do nvidia fanboys justify paying more for the same performance? dont get me wrong, I was a nvidia fanboy, but for 600$ my 7800xt is as good as the 4070, which was 25% more expensive EDIT: meant to say 7800xt, not 6800xt, mb
@@ThePgR777 still doesn't explain why gamers bought the 1050ti instead of the RX6600. where you typically pay more for Nvidia for less performance. As for power saving Unless you're testing at the wall reported power use is not accurate and the amount of actual money saved over the average GPU ownership period is less than any upfront cost when upgrading. I had a choice between a 4060 and an RX6800...I got the RX6800 undervolted it under 200watts and get more FPS with native resolution compared to the GPU with DLSS...
@@alanx216 rtx does not matter, it's just eye candy good for showcasing games. it does not help gameplay. racing games, dont need raytracing, shooters, dont need raytracing, strategy games, mobas, mmorpgs, none of them need raytracing. Raytracing is like having racing lines on a normal car, it looks nice, but it doesnt make it faster EDIT: and at 600$ you get either 7800xt that can use all 16gb of vram, or a 4060 ti with 16gb but not enough bus memory to use all 16Gigs at once on any game
I've been a green boy since the 8800GTX which was insanely good at running Crysis. I had the 1070, the 1080ti and the 3070 after. But the 3070 felt so limited with only 8gb for such a good die I felt a little robbed. With gpu prices being so absurd I went with the RX7900GRE and couldn't be happier. Team red drivers are much much better than when I tried the RX580 , I had zero issues with mine so far. Even with OC. Adrenaline drivers aren't perfect yet , but nvidia drivers also took a dive since the rtx3000, I had some odd small issues with my 3070.
Dear @@R-Endanger , DLSS is not supported i very game and it is a fake thing. It iss better to set the game to 1080 p on a 4K monitor. On a 1440P it is a big problem. That is not a good resolution. And Frame Gen wisse is AMD a lot better, than nvidia but those are also fake frames. So these SW realted things are just cheatings. SSo I would better use 1080P native. Maybe with frame gen, if the frames are high enough for that (240 FPS) becausse of it causes bigger latency. rtx is still a joke. Only 4090 is good for that but still a lot worse, than without it. Most of the people use higher FPS, than rtx. On my opinion we still have to wait 2 generations for good rtx/path tracing, which is lot better, than rtx. There are some comparisons about it in cyberpunk. But everybody does with their money, what they want. If they want the best card, they will buy a 4090. If they want a good price/perf card, they will buy 7800 XT, or 7900 GRE, maybe 7900 XT. 7700 XT has only 12 GB of VRAM. And for cheaper solutions there is 6800 non XT, 6700/XT, or 6600/XT and 7600, hese are all good cards for that price.
I’ve been looking at building my first PC and you couldn’t PAY me to run any 4060. I have been looking at an AMD card (RX 7900 XT) and really Nvidia wasn’t even on my radar… and still, even today, the only card from Nvidia in my current price point that I would consider at all is the RTX 4070 TI Super. I would like to say that the only reason I’m even considering the 4070 TI Super is because of you, Vex, because you made a good point about buying such a high end card and just not getting all the features (like Ray/Path Tracing and DLSS.) So thanks for making my decision harder!
Its because people hear 'DLSS' and 'FRAME GEN' and 'RTX' and..... '8GB OF VRAM' and then people proceed to cream their pants. Also the more we judge things in pure raster the harder it is for Nvidia to deceive us with AI tricks and force them to make anything else but their enthusiast class halo products have actual meaningful performance gains.
Been a long time nvidia guy from the 750 to 1070 and 3060 and I recently got a 7900xt I have to say it actually is good for what I payed for I can run 1440p max setting on all games except tarkov because it’s unoptimized
I bought a 4060 because it was the cheapest card I could find at best buy, and it's much better than my old GTX 1060 6GB. I have a cousin who works in tech that told me to avoid AMD's GPUs since he says that most of the time whenever someone comes in with a GPU problem, it's an AMD one
One thing that I've noticed is while 4060 Desktop seemed like a bad value for money or Desktop side, The laptop variant of the card seemed really good for the budget and it's literally the 3rd most popular in the steam hardware survey
They're dominating in the low and mid range. No way in hell was I going to get an RTX 4060 over an RX 6750 XT for $300 a few weeks ago, I already consistently use over 8gb of VRAM in many games.
I'd buy amd GPUs if they had more capable cards but they don't. I don't use my gpus for just gaming, I use them for gaming, rendering and local AI. So basically buying an AMD card is buying something with 1/3 of the of the functionality for my use.
@@A1mb0t_Fr0z3n7600 XT 16 gb was a disaster not the 4060 ti 16 lol 4060 ti 16 can easily do ray tracing with Dlss and FG but your shitty 7600 or even a 7800xt can't even with fsr FG And also fsr looks 🤢 like this at the moment
@@Fronioll9973 yup i don't understand the hate. Plus a lot of people seems to forgot that gpus don't have the same price in every country.... In France that was a good deal
Good points, my reason to get the 4060 is power consumption. Just that, by all the other metrics is mediocre at best, but power consumption costs money and running a gamming pc where I live costs about 40-60 dollars a month in electricity mid use for actually gaming.
RDNA3 has been a failure. I constantly hear about driver instability issues. Every 3 months theres another Driver debacle like Anti Lag+. Thats not even including the complete and miserable failure of FSR. Their framegen is nice but the upscaler cant even compete with Intels XeSS. Its not hard to see why Radeon is failing, and contrary to every AMD fanboy, consumers are smart enough to pick up on that. Its not brain rot, its savvy shoppers understanding Radeon is not a good bet.
@@tmsphere happy for you. But that doesn’t mean anything for consistency. On the whole, driver issues have been a constant issue for Radeon. Whether it be something as broad as Ratchet and Clank having RT disabled for Radeon, or driver timeout and black screen issues. Just because you haven’t been affected doesn’t mean these issues don’t exist. For instance, just because you don’t play CS2 and didn’t get banned when you turned on AL+ doesn’t mean others didn’t.
It's not that average people are buying 4060's themselves, they're buying prebuilts with 4060's in them. On top of that, you have to factor in Internet Cafe's.
Was going to write the same thing.
and laptops
People always forget that probably 99% of the people in the steam survey didn't build their own pc, didn't consider which parts are in the prebuild they bought and even if they did, they've been exposed to nvidia and intel for years through stickers on laptops and pcs that even if they consider which brand, they take what they know...
Also in some markets AMD cards are almost non-existent. The only optioms are previous or current gen Nvidia cards. Since 4060 Ti is still the most recent card in this price range, people tend to choose it.
Also people with financial issues, if credit is your only way of obtaining a GPU then you're stuck with what a store stocks. In my case it was a 4060 at £299 or a 4060ti for £200 more. picked the 4060 because back in 2018 a 1050 2gb was costing me £200 and that was what i got stuck with for 4-5 years.
look at it my way for £100 more than i paid last time i got 4x the ram and can actually play current AAA titles on a pc at medium-high, 1080p-1440p, when before wii emulation lagged and PUBG was so un-playable i gave up on pc,s as a hobby entirely.
Zero fanboying
Zero sponsorships
100% brutal honesty no one seems to want to hear on the internet
I like to think most people respect a good back and forth and have loyalties in moderation. Gotta remember that you’re much more likely to talk if you feel strongly opinionated about a particular subject.
Too bad bro relies on paid views, clickbaity thumbnails, and a 100% dependency on other reviewers for the content he posts.
@@comicsanz97isn't too bad for me. His content focuses on just providing his own sentiments about what's happening around the tech world in general. Nothing is wrong with that.
The thing is...your average joe doesn't know or care enough about stuff like that. They see amd and immediately think of bad drivers. They see intel and ask themselves "who tf is that" (talking about the gpu market). So they are left with nvidia. At which point they go "what is my budget?" and purchase the first card they see
Point is most customers want their GPU to be able to do everything... AMDs terrible performance in raytracing etc is a major factor in them not selling to the average joe. You may say RT is not important but it is when you are spending $$$ on a GPU - it's like buying an iPhone that has a camera that shoots in 240p, it's buying a GPU with less features.
even average joe doesn't even watch reviews, he just goes to any store buy whatever highest the GPU he could buy in his budget from nvidia
many people still believe that ray tracing is a nvidia specific feature, although irony is that rarely any of the budget cards can't even run on raster properly
many people just don't know AMD is a proper well know brand, they just buy what brand they or their friends have heard about it
@@alanx216
your "average joe" for sure does not care about raytracing lmfao... ray tracing only matters to 3D artists (or people who do rendering stuff) and PC enthusiast .... (if you buy low and mid tier (rtx 4050 - 4070) gpus just to use raytracing, you are just screwing yourself here LOL)
the only reason people buy nvidia more than AMD is because of branding and marketing... just like apple vs android phones..
@@alanx216 Lol? Ray tracing is in no way as important of a feature as a good camera in a phone, and amd isn't even that bad at raytracing. You'll get lower performance, yes, but it's not like the cards are unable to run most games with RT. Especially when most games that actually utilize it are console games which run on amd hardware anyway. It's more like buying a phone that doesn't have stereo speakers lol
@@hachikuji_mayoi This is the point, it's not important to YOU.... it is important to the average joe consumer that wants all the features possible.
Lots of dealers across small markets kept AMD prices higher than Nvidia on purpose. It was the only way they could sell so outrageously priced GeForce. And they had A LOT of Nvidia cards.
thats actually really interesting and nasty ngl
Because AMD is as greedy as Nvidia and price matches them instead of going for the throat even when they have good GPUs.
AMD intentionally ignores opportunities to grow it's market share.
Yes, this is why I bought 4080 super over 7900xtx
@@khlaps if radeon and amd would put those gpus with less money they probably will won and they would sell more, if they just give those card like 150 $ maybe they would win against nvidia but alas that wont happen its a fact
THIS. People thinking AMD is not as greedy as Nvidia is funny 😂. Both of their CEO is cousin or atleast related to each other.
That's true on release date, thing is even after aggresive price cuts, yet people still bought Nvidia, point in case rx6800 is consistently at sub $400, i even can find one right now at $370, yet people still prefer 4060ti 8gb which have worse value.
@@tomthomas3499 this AMD tactic "release overpriced and become competitive via deals/sales" doesn't work outside of US as much. Everything is based on MSRP where I live and cheapest 4060 Ti costs 1450 of our local currency Vs 2000 for cheapest new RX 6800.
AMD cards must be 25-30% cheaper from the very start to have a chance - until they achieve feature and power efficiency parity.
Like Hub said, people want AMD to be competitive so that they can buy cheaper Nvidia instead, but in reality even after some aggresive price cuts no one actually buying Radeon, yet we still act surprised whenever Nvidia launched overpriced products, the blame is on us by keep buying their products 😂
I mean I bought AMD brand new even, but my card isn't even on the steam hardware survey lol
Nvidia is just better. And I use AMD. I used Nvidia before, and it's just better.
@@mohamedrafik9271 better at what ? RT ? I have 50 games in my steam library and only 1 uses RT. It's Minecraft. I'm not going to buy an Nvidia GPU just to get 200fps in Minecraft RT instead of 150 ☠️☠️☠️
Does Integrated graphics count in scenarios like these?
@@Rullino32yeah the one in the laptop counts to
Nvidia low end is overpriced because of overhyped high end and "exclusive" tech.
Nvidias no Vram line up is overpriced and pretty useless.
Overhyped sounds like a hater word.
yes, but their high end is not "over hyped" as it is usually the best of the best. it's certainly overpriced itself. But you can't overhype something that is the hands down best in the world. that's like saying the russian Tsar Bomba was an overhyped nuclear weapon when it was litterally the biggest nuke ever made and twice as powerful as any thing the USA ever built nuke wise . it was a bomb that was so masive and did so much damage that when the russians tested it they decided to sit down with nato and the US and discuss banning atmospheric tests of nukes. well that's Nvidia's top end. a Tsar Bomba of video cards every generation. you can't overhype that.
the issue here is folks buying their low end knowing damn well they are just little m-70 firecrackers compared to the nuclear weapons that the 4080 and 4080 are.
Over priced, yes, overhyped? You're pushing it.
There's nothing that comes even close to their top card
And even the one below it makes sense to buy for the average joe or even someone who knows about GPUs.
Nvidia has been pushing new technologies since forever (physx,HBAO+ etc, FG, DLSS),AMD has only been following, acting like this success isn't "deserved" or comes from nothing is crazy hate
@@DenverStarkey I hope you used ai to write all that. I overhyped = overpriced, you = overthink.
The problem is the fact that most ppl buy prebuild PCs and in the prebuild PCs and i mean the prebuilt ones that you go to the shop and straight up buy them without touching pc builder on the sites or stuff like that , 4060ti is more represented than 7700xt , i can find like 25 variations of prebuild PCs that have 4060ti installed in it while only 5 that have 7700xt and they usually only go with ryzen cpus and not intel. And to be fair , the TDP is also a factor , yeah 7700xt is faster , while drawing 100w more power that means not only your pc draws more power but it also produces more heat , witch can be detrimental in countries with 45C temperatures in the summer cause not only your video card is drawing more power but it also produces more heat witch in terms affect your cooling bill too
I was going to post the same thing. Quite a lot of people just buy prebuilt PCs.
Another factor is that Nvidia has CUDA. While it (hopefully) doesn't make anyone buy a 4060, it does make a lot of professional users disregard AMD cards. Every software worth its salt supports it and you are just not getting anything for AMD cards in most cases - there just is no alternative.
Honestly y'all thinking 100W is going to change a whole room's temperature significantly is hilarious. 100W is 0.1 kWh. You need 1.16kWh to add 1°C to 1m³. So if your room is 15m² with 2m of height, that's 30m³. To add 1° to this room you'll need 30 × 1.16 = 34.8kWh. 34.8kWh / 0.1kWh = 348 *hours* to heat up the room by 1 degree. Not taking into account losses. This is also an approximation, and a whole pc is maybe 400-500W of power so obviously it's faster but basically 100W is nothing compared to a whole room. ❤❤❤ Your whole pc would take 34.8/0.5=69.6 *HOURS* to heat up your room by 1°C , *AND WITHOUT TAKING LOSSES INTO ACCOUNT*
Correction:
Honestly y'all thinking 100W is going to change a whole room's temperature significantly is hilarious. 100W is 0.1 kWh.
You need 0.34Wh to add 1°C to 1m³. So if your room is 15m² with 2m of height, that's 30m³. To add 1° to this room you'll need 30 × 0.34 = 10,2 kWh. 10,2Wh / 0.1kWh = 102 *hours* to heat up the room by 1 degree. Not taking into account losses. This is also an approximation, and a whole pc is maybe 400-500W of power so obviously it's faster but basically 100W is nothing compared to a whole room. ❤❤❤ Your whole pc would take 10,2/0.5=20,4 *HOURS* to heat up your room by 1°C , *AND WITHOUT TAKING LOSSES INTO ACCOUNT*
Yeah I admit my mistakes even when defending a brand I like. That's called not being a fanboy.
I would say its the prebuilds, not a lot of people build they're own pcs and the 4060ti pcs are often at that 800-1000$ price point.
So with good marketing you can sell literally shit 💩
😢
i mean apple doing it so ?
@@bilirain I think selling excellent material very expensive is different from selling junk material very expensive
@@NL-84 ehh apple selling same shit every year
Its not only about marketing, Nvidia is on the market for decades and they built a strong reputation over the years, while AMD started poorly and built a very negative reputation for a long time before the Ryzen series. And are now trusted regarding the CPU; but not yet regarding the GPU
People don't measure the performance of AMD and Nvidia cards 1 to 1.
They take AMD native FPS and put it against
Nvidia with DLSS turned ON 100% of the time - FPS.
Its mostly the sheeps that do that. And whenever i try to introduce them to fsr they always complain at something
@@flamingophone i use amd but fsr does lack compared to dlss but supported for even a rx 580 is legendary
@@flamingophoneIn fairness FSR has significantly worse image quality than DLSS
@@flamingophone at least talk about xess as an argument... cus fsr is just bad.
@@SimplCup i told one of them about xess. He responded by questioning what was that
Reviewers keep emphasizing 1440p, but forget that 1080p is still the most popular resolution.
It's not hard to see why it is so popular when you really think about it.
1. A lot of consumers don't know enough, but brand familiarity sways in nvidias favor.
2. Their budget doesn't allow for anything stronger.
3. They might have upgraded from an ancient system, meaning it is a massive improvement for them.
4. The increase in power draw combined with the increase in prices of electricity over the last few years also affects gpu choices.
5. Access to dlss.
6. The games they play might not need anything stronger than that.
7. They play at 1080p to make their system last for as long as possible, this includes tweaking the settings to what they feel is optimal for them.
8. The prebuilt section taking up a sizeable chunk since a lot of people don't know how to build a pc by themselves.
I can relate with the power draw thing. as my bills are high for me, so I opted for amd cpus as they take less power now will upgrade my gpu to rx 560 4gb to rtx 4060ti or rtx 4070 super when my money is saved up.
either way both will be a huge upgrade for me.
also 1440p gaming is still expensive for me, I am still good for 1080p gaming. 😊
I went from intel i7-7700 to ryzen 7 7700.
As someone who still plays 1080p and want dlss and good ray tracing yeah.
As crazy as it may sound for 1080p i am upgrading to a r7 7800x3d and 4070super soon.
Might try 1440p but probably will stay at 1080p. Am someone who rather have double the fps instead of looking little bit better.
but again if you game at 1080p DLSS is a pointless feature for you, and AMD still has the better price to performance on all cards from budget to hi-end, non of this comes together.
@@tmsphere A low cost gamer already knows what it means to sacrifice eye candy for playability.
How did you even reach a conclusion that dlss is pointless at 1080p?
And Nvidia runs DX11 better.
Personally - I've always owned nvidia Gpu's and intel cpu's. Ran a gtx1060 then 1080ti for 8 years or more and the 1080ti is still used as a 2nd pc today..
Recently built a new pc - Went with 7900 XTX and a 7800x3d after doing a lot of research and could not be happier
The performance has been amazing i couldn't care less about raytracing although i have used it with the 7900xtx
I think i have had 2 or 3 crashes after many hours of gameplay (500+) and honestly it could have just been game issues .
Its never been something i can re-create was just a random crash
Hats off to AMD i reckon - More ppl need to give them a go!
If they go out of their way to improve prices for the non-"mainstream" countries (as far as technology consumption goes), more people might be willing to. In my country, AMD prices aren't actually better than Nvidia's. They also have less features, higher power draw (at least compared to the lower-end 40-series), worse resale value, and worse availability. That's a lot of reasons that stack against AMD, and not too many for it.
People don't do their research and keep getting ripped off by Nvidia its crazy... Why pay more for less performance makes no sense but that's the average consumer for ya lmao.
That’s the thing: you did research and built your own PC. NVIDIA (for whatever reason, probably just scale) is hugely over represented in prebuilt systems, and many people won’t do much research but just buy whatever system fits their budget. Name recognition helps. AMD will have a hard time winning market share as long as they can’t get PC vendors to use their GPUs more. Even when AMD does price their GPUs competitively and undercuts NVIDIA, they still get outsold.
If it's about gaming only AMD wins easily, but when it comes to productivity, it's hard not to go Nvidia. My friends don't just game on their PCs, they do editing, 3D design, a 16GB 4060ti isn't as bad of a card when it is on sale. Most people want to buy new and are afraid of buying 2nd hand cards so there are even less options around 400-450 euro.
Nvidia cards also are power efficient
Nvidia gpu and ryzen cpu ig
@@lemonke5341 yep
@@Fronioll9973not the case with the higher end Nvidia GPUs. With amd GPUs u can undervolt and power limit and u can make a card consume 10% less power while having stock or even better than stock performance.
@@TheRealName7 the fps also decreases by doing that
Another thing is availability, it took me MONTHS to find a well priced amd gpu as every store in my country didn't bother to sell them, and who did they just sold it with a very overpriced price. While nividia 4060 was being sold at a very VERY competitive price its crazy
Wow, may i ask what continent are you from? Here in europe(from where i'm from) nvidia gpu's are more expensive, or at best, msrp.
@@Deceit-hx7ey im from jordan
80% of GPU sales are through other companies that install these cards in already finished computers and the user gets a finished computer.
How many people are there in this world and how many subscribers does each tech channel that deals in detail with hardware have? Usually around 200-300k but up to 2-3 million max. We here are less than 1% of PC users. What we think is so in this circle. Outside it is totally different. See 1 company that favors AMD graphics over nVidia.
It's quite simple, we gamers are fools, we live in a monopoly, technically an oligopoly, in the CPU and GPU markets and we simply don't care, we are the embodiment of the meme "Don't ask questions just consume product and then get excited for next products", At least finding your channel was something cool in the last few weeks.
Well said. Buy ONLY what you need and save those shiny coins for rainy days (catastrophies in life).
Dreams rarely work out but bad times do and often, that's why saving money is important. In good times many people piss money away than bad times come and they are screwed.
It's because of the brainrot market. Nvidia's consumer market is now very similar to apples consumer market. People do 0 research and jump straight to the most popular company, I mean it's the most popular right? So surely its the best, literal Chiwawa's who follow the loudest voice. Then you have people with brains who do a little research because they value their money. It's not like you have to spend hours either, just a few google searches, some reviews on YT and bam. You've most likely found a card that you need.
Yep, entirely this. It's not DLSS, CUDA, etc., because normies don't know what that stuff is. The truth is that Nvidia is the most popular because... Nvidia is the most popular.
None of the normie gamers want to explain to their normie gamer friends that they bought something those friends think is second best due to "value".
All my research led to nividia hahaha 😂 ur brain rotted
And even all this for what? being able to run the latest game? I could wait 5 years to play a today's game (in max settings) because that's the bulk of gaming we have today already .we gotta satisfy our needs, not greeds
And Nvidia is simply selling us our GREEDS
if that's the case AMD will never gain any market share against intel. AMD come with good CPU and they gain market share against intel. it is the same with GPU.
@@arenzricodexd4409 Do you realise how long it took for AMD to start getting as much market share as intel? Intel still have 65% of share, and that's only on the steam hardest survey, there's an event bigger disparity because of how much intel dominated at the begining.
the average Joe doesn't care about those presentations and lies companies do to promote their products, neither they care to hunt to down graphical downgrades when using upscaling.
It's mostly about brand names.
That's also true for phones or computers.
Intel has monopoly on pre built PC's cpus and Nvidia has monopoly on pre built PC's gpus. Thats the reason amd hasnt already have alot of market share. Intel and Nvidia can just bribe suppliers to not sell AMD stuff.
in Intel's case, bribery money might be getting short soon depending on how the defective 13th and 14th gen cpu situation developes 😅
During my university days I also realised that lots of people buy gaming laptops as well and like 90-95% of those have Nvidia dGPU.
I got an ASUS TUF 7900XTX for £790 which was nearly £300 cheaper for the same model in the 4080 super. If they priced them like that day one, they would be raking the money in.
Something that bothers me a lot are people who buy a lackluster RTX card just because it has DLSS like it's some kind of silver bullet, even if the similarly priced AMD GPU is still faster when using native resolution. Not saying this applies to every price point, but it certainly applies to some.
@@yasu_red bro the prob is that amd is only max to max 10 fps faster .
Maybe for you in your prebuilt hp Walmart pc lol
I only buy for raytracing. What can I do with a 7900XTX when it delivers almost half the fps with RT on in Alan Wake 2 of a 4070 ti super. Went for the 4070 ti super and got a good av1 encoder and DLSS on top. What do I need above 4080 raster power for. Raster is never the bottleneck today. RT is the bottleneck. Buying AMD is the same as pairing a 10 years old 3770k with a 4090. Totally unreasonable. A 7900XTX or any other AMD card has too muchraster power for its RT power. So you're basically wasting die place for stuff that never will be used unless you play old games. But once you turn on rt the raster cores are chilling their ass of waiting for the rt cores to bring more data. Those two need to be balanced and nvidia is a loooooot better at that.
@@williehrmann absolutely right man
You also get: reflex, FG, AV1 encoding,
And Nvidia is, because of MANY years releasing features for games and sponsoring them, far more popular
I have a 4060. I got it against most reviewer recommendations. Why? Well, the 4060 in particular is extremely efficient and therefore I had no reason to upgrade my 450 watt power supply saving $50 to $100. It also takes advantage of Nvidia's superior DLSS which allows you to bump resolution up one step with virtually no downside. Last I had one bad experience with an AMD card not running well on one of my older games. I also play a lot of older less demanding games and the added power is just not needed.
I downgraded from 4090 to 4060 Low Profile when I built my 5L backpackable PC.
AMD simply has nothing even closely matching for SFF cases.
DLSS with an 8GB vram buffer is a suttery mess, you should just have bought a 7600xt
It doesn't sttuter 😂 I have it and it doesn't even with rt
And btw 7600 XT is just like 5 to 6fps faster in only a few games but in rt it can't even compete . + Dlss ain't like your ass fsr 🤣 It doesn't look blurry it looks like native @@mercurio822
@@mercurio822Well this is very dependent on game and settings. And you didn't read the comment at all.
@@lilpain1997 did read and you bought a bad GPU an inferior product, most older games dont have and dont need DLSS. so any argument you have is invalid right there.
And AMD have an built into driver solution if you are in need of scaling resolutions among other things, frame gen etc
but at this point, DLSS and FSR are pretty useless compared to lossless scaling on steam, its better then all other solutions.
I work at a PC hardware store in Canada called CanadaComputers. Most of the 4060ti's sell in prebuilds because there is no AMD competition for prebuilds. If someone does try to buy a 4060ti I have always convinced that person otherwise. Either get the 4060 or get the 7700xt which has been the same price as the 4060ti for a long time.
cos many game dev only optmized for nvidia.. since they are their sponser, even bungie did
4060ti is actually the real 4060, while 4060 is actually 4050. since they use AD106 and 107 meant for 60 and 50.
That's not been true for over a decade, games are designed with AMD in mind and fully optimised for Ryzen and RDNA because that is what is in consoles. What Nvidia does is pay developers to use their tech for certain graphical options instead of AMD's or some other open standard.
games benchmark videos ive seen tell a very different story. Just bc it has a green logo on it doesnt mean jack shit just as well as if it was a red logo its just the game dev taking money to advertise a GPU for you, it never meant anything.
This just isn’t tru. Consoles are built on AMD and we see many games (more than 50%) running better on AMD
AMD has the entire console market (short of the switch ) for themselves for over a decade now. And consoles are the things games are optimized and made for. AMD has an unbelievable advantage and still can't compete, it's actually astonishing how incompetent they are.
No, because in GPU rendering benchmark 4060ti has almost the same score as rtx3080, no way its 4050/4060
speak for yourself. the last nvidia gpu i bought was a 1080ti, which is still decent in 2024.... thats 7 years later and it was bought 2nd hand. i got an amd cpu in my rig right now 5600x , bit outdated but not really outdated. still gets the job done.
I have AMD 6700XT Red Devil and AMD Ryzen 7 5700g and loving it :D
i love how you keep uploading interesting videos about interesting subjects, keep em coming
I Was about to buy a 4070 TI 12 GB of Vram for a total of $934.00 Then before I clicked by now, I asked myself how much crack did I smoke that day? ? ?
I think a rtx3080 is a good deal now
when the RTX 4060 was released, i hated not the card but the price. 9 months later, I bought it. I need a card that use less power and is efficient since I'm only running on solar power paired with an AMD Ryzen 5 5600. The RTX 4060Ti though, I can't stomach the price and is literally useless for me.
My reason for sticking with Nvidia is not necessarily drivers but CUDA and TensorRT, if only there was a way to use TensorRT on AMD then i would switch platforms. There's also DLSS and VR performance, I really want to switch to AMD but the 7800xt disappointed me being a minor improvement over 6800xt.
I am wondering if the number is thrown off because there is a lot of 4060ti's in laptops and I remember this happening with the 1060. The steam HW list wouldn't make a distinction between the desktop/laptop version.
There is also a gpu called “4060 ti laptop GPU” to account for this. Which ig would mean the 4060 ti is actually under represented there…
It’s simple. CUDA cores. People who also value productivity apps, no matter their opinion on NVIDIA, whether they’re a fanboy or not, they will be pushed towards choosing their GPUs. Because of those cores, which are only exclusive to NVIDIA GPUs, AMD is lagging behind them in terms of performance in productivity.
Facts.
There are definitely people that go for NVIDIA due too productivity and if you need a graphics card for productivity you can be the biggest AMD fanboy there is and still would have no reason too buy an AMD card but honestly most people that buy graphics cards are casual gamers that dont know what cuda cores are how much VRAM they need for there setup and games or what differences between DLSS and FSR exist, they might not even know what upscaling generally is.
Most people are still on 1080p monitors and dont spend 500+ euro or dollars for a graphics card were the current gen cards from nvidia actually become competitive.
The reason these people buy Nvidia because its the most popular and they all heard about Raytracing and thats it.
My father for example bought a 4060ti because a 4070 was out of his price range, he knows AMD has graphic cards but he did default too buying NVIDIA just because its NVIDIA and he wanted too try Raytracing which the card can barely handle.
Productivity is literally the only reason i go with Nvidia. So you're spot on.
@@Fractal_blip Good choice honestly AMD graphic cards just seem way more future proof if you only need them for gaming.
I recently bought a new pc and had the choice between the 4070super and 7900gre, went for the 7900gre eventually.
My PC's main purpose is Gaming and working but my work only really contains MS Office and some Chat-GPT aside from that some movie streaming and thats it even in this price range AMD was the proper choice for me.
The 12gb VRAM a 4070super delivers will sooner or later not be enough considering i use a 3440x1440p monitor. DLSS and Framegen would have been nice but you know once 5000 series releases and they do major updates for DLSS the 4000 series cards will probably be locked out of these features as NVIDIA did the same too 3000 series cards for framegen even though they are capable of using it.
AMD FSR recently got a framegen update and even though there are only a handful of games supporting it so far it even works on older RTX cards.
Raytracing is also kinda overhyped so far, it was not nearly as visually pleasing for me as i thought it would have been seeing youtube videos but i so far i tested only CP2077, Eldenring and BF2042.
CUDA cores + NVENC. Everyone wants to be a streamer or UA-camr. NVIDIA has no competition when it comes to encoding.
I can't stand AMD any longer. Their software is not up to par. Frequent driver timeouts, buggy Adrenaline not opening, and lackluster optimization
Honestly everything going on right now makes it hard to care about it.
I just left a comment criticising your mic quality but you should ignore that because in this video it is fixed and very nice
switched from a pre built pc with AMD integrated graphics which i bought in 2021 for £600 to a 4060 prebuilt on sale for £799 original price was £999 going from 30fps on rocket league to 500 on it with a 4060 was huge for me so i think the 4060 was worth it for what i do.
yep integrated graphics have always been pap, just something to put a picture on the screen while you rma the g card you've blown up, or the g card has failed.. it's meant for super basic tasks like surfing the web to get drivers etc.. NOT for gaming, although they prob can run the original Doom at full chat!
AMD is unreliable. A lot of Linux Community praises AMD on linux tell they realized AMD has never reliably offered opencl on Linux while Nvidia has had a stable cuda driver for 10-15 plus years now on Linux.
I would have been on Linux day one of dxvk if it wasn't for having an AMD GPU.
Nvidia GPUs easily offer dlss, ray tracing and VR in Linux.
AMD has plenty of odd ball issues on windows as well.
User's don't care about performance or price. They just want everything to boot/launch on they're PC.
Same issue with snapdragon x. People just want the hardware to run correctly.
And DX11 runs bad on AMD.
the problem really isn't the average joe, it's more the enthusiast building community not voting with their wallets. high end dictates low end
No offense.....nothing enticing about amd except for the price of course.....but this price is justified as amd lack features that nvidia offer....thats all.
not only they insult us but they're trying their hardest to replace you, too. They already got me :(
Still buying Nvidia. AMD isn't anywhere near cheap enough to compete in term of image quality/price ratio, just because of DLSS. Nvidia also had better OpenGL and even vulkan support, as well as Blender support (I gave up on blender/art myself, due to AI, but it's still an argument in favor of Nvidia)
They had a nice lineup in RDNA3. RX 7900 even does the ray tracing. Nvidia just gave 4070 more performance, 4070Ti more VRAM and 4080 lower price. Targeting the issues and nailing them.
AMD needed 7900GRE to clock faster, 7900XT and 7900XTX to have lower prices. They fixed the GRE too late. 7900XT/XTX are still expensive.
when amd can exceed nvidia cards using dlss while rendering natively 😱
Guys let me tell you the truth: PRICE, most gamers are ok to spend between 300-500 for a GPU but with the current prices ? Noway I'm buying a 4070 at 700-800$
2:07 Because almost everyone on the tech space was drooling of how of an good deal the RTX 4090 Was/is. Remember the Tech YES! City's Can of beans?
But barely anyone buys them they're way off off of most ppl's budgets.
@@tmsphere you say that but the fact of the matter is Nvidia has sold as many 4090's as AMDs entire RDNA 3 lineup let that sink in.
Couldn't wait for Battlemage launch. Bought Rx 6750xt @ Amazon prime day
I bought a 4060 Ti 16gb ($430) because it was the best GPU my 450-watt PSU could handle. If I had bought a better value GPU and a new PSU, I would have been getting less value for my money. That's it, clean and simple.
I have a 4060ti 16gb I upgraded on a prebuilt that came with a 1660ti. It was a massive increase in performance. I think it’s a pretty solid card, despite the relentless push to say it’s trash.
if you bought a 850w for 100 and a rx 6800 for 340 it would have been way better and allowed for further gpu upgrades in the future
@@asa-ze1kn Dang
@@ravenger2445 if it works for you 🤷
@@ganthc but it's trash though. It should have been at least 20% faster to be a true 3060ti successor. Also it shouldn't have been 500$ on launch, 420 at most, with price dropping to 370 after a year.
What is your take on Intel 13th and 14th K SKU CPU blue screen issues ? Do you know 13th and 14th CPU even crashing on W680 chipset workstations ?W680 is workstation chipset , cant overclock , only run in stock memory and stock power profile . Do you know how important game servers is for on line gamers ? Do you know high latency problem on these Intel CPUs ? Have you tried LatencyMon on your Intel PC ?
Yea. With My nividia-intel-msi hardware has Ben the best combo yet. Amd has always Been slower
W680 motherboards can overclock there RAM, but only at 1.1V
I’m cookin something rn 😉
@@cks5148 There are people dismissing this as user error still and it just baffles me. W680 systems having numerous problems when they usually have very conservative settings is a very bad sign.
@@Kdog307what makes it slow?
The fact is: Nvidia is more stable. I have AMD gpu and I love it. But I used Nvidia too, and Nvidia is far more stable. Also, Nvidia is selling it's gou's for everyone, individuals and corporations, and even small businesses like internet cafe's and game zones. I don't imagine a small business like an internet cafe or a game zone is going to risk buying an AMD, because even if the performance is better, AMD gou's are not plug and play, and are not stable, and they tend to crash way way more than Nvidia. And that's a fact. Some fanboys are going to get mad when they read this, but it's just a fact. A 4060 is a bad value, but its not going to crash when you play at high settings 1080p or 1440p with dlss. But an AMD gpu like 6700XT or 6800XT or one from the 7000s series, is going to crash even if it's giving a better performance and higher fps.
The only few reasons why I like nvidia gpus is because they have a well know naming system. If someone is trying to flex their pc and they say 7900xtx is laughable or incomprehensible compared to if they say 4090. The second reason is the founders gpu's, I love the fact that they are exclusive/limited time and they always look amazing and fit the nvidia brand. The third reason is software, I mean just look at fsr frame gen vs nvidia, it's night and day which is better cuz fsr looks like xbox cloud gaming on horrible internet. If AMD starts implementing the same things I would be very inclined to buy from them, my brother has a 7900xt and he likes it but he said next time he would buy nvidia for video editing and better software.
Nvidia's naming scheme is definitely superior, AMD's naming scheme is almost a fraud talking as someone who's happy with the confusingly named 7900xt. It really took a lot of research to come down to getting this over the 4070ti.
Surrounding also influence your decision. This way Nvidea wins also. The 2nd hand market is good for Nvidea and when that kind of discount is there people are ready to let go AMD and opt Nvidea. For me I am considering 3070ti for 25k when 3070 is at 21k and 3060ti at 19k. 6700xt is for 20k used. We can get new RX 7600 for 25k and 4060 for 27.5k. so I can opt for RX7600 when on offer it drops to 21.5k. So my options are used 3070ti or RX 7600 new with a 12400f with H series mobo for temporary and then change to AM5 with a good GPU in Hand. I will solve this mystery but the option of 3070ti is really logical for meaningfull purchase. The AMD service centre are also in question in India. Intel and Nvidea rule here in India because of there service and availability. Also budget segment products of these 2 are cheaper as compared to AMD except RX6600.
Where cam i find used graphics cards in India?
@@siddhantbisht6121 I am looking on facebook marketplace. Also trying to collect some info on zoukart... let me know how you are considering it.
4070 super shouldn't even be over 450. Current prices are delusional.
nah now you just don’t know what you’re saying, be reasonable, the cheapest a 4070 super should be is 500-525 lol
not saying ur wrong but just be reasonable with how society is rn and the current market
@@ethaneaves_04 a GTX 960 was on par with the last gen flagship for way less then the 650 a 4070super costs, and a 4070super isn't faster than the last gen fastest card either.
It's just terrible value. The best card is a 4060 and even that should be about half the price realistically if you look at what tier the card is.
As a Radeon user (RX 7800 XT) the only reason I went with AMD is because of price, 7800 XT was cheaper than 4070 super and better in raster performance than 4070. It's a good rasterization card and has a high vram but that's it. It's ray tracing is unusable in most games without heavy FSR and since I absolutely despise FSR (can't stand the ghosting and shimmering) I can't use ray tracing with native 1440p res. Radeons are basically just newer GTX cards, forget about ray tracing or DLSS on these cards. I tried to delude myself that I don't care about ray tracing or DLSS but I do. They're great features to have. If I had more money I would buy 4070 super. Now I'm stuck with this brick. Buyers remorse is setting in. 😔
Nvidia just has so much (deserved) historical brand recognision at this point that it’s simply the default choice for non-techy gamers. Same reason you’re gonna crash and burn if you try to compete with Sony Playstation, unless you have something extremely good to offer.
had 2 AMDs in the past. I want Nvidia next for ai stuff that is just plug and play, AMD apparently doesnt give a shit about that at all.
Well no, cuz AI is gay.
@@TheRealName7 yeah AMD is totally cool for gaming, more performance on low and mid tier for sure. But absolute horseshit for AI stuff.
@@__-fi6xg with that I can agree with, that's just the truth, amd gets smoked by Nvidia when it comes to AI
AI works for me. AMD homies should lookup "NOD AI shark". I run it on my 7900xtx and get about 18-24it/s The 24GB VRAM is nice for me.
AMD is the most basic plug and play software there is for any GPU, its really one of the few places they outdo Nvidia completely is the gaming compatibility and plug & play nature what they lack in features.
A large number of consumers just buy ready to ship builds or custom builds from shops base on proce/budget. They're just happy it works.
One problem is that reviewers always do like for like comparisons, but gamers pretty much always use DLSS, which makes NVidia a much more compelling option than AMD at any price point.
When you prefer native resolution over bloated frame gen fps, it ceases to matter as much. RT performance is a much bigger motivator
On AMD just use LS1 or LSFG2.1 (Lossless Scaling) if FSR is not available.
It's RTX and DLSS but FSR 3.1 is very promising too. AMD needs to up its ray tracing ante and they are working on it.
Personally I hate DLSS, I always play at native if I can bc everything else looks like muddy crap to me
One thing you have to consider is this: different marketplaces will have different prices. Currently, the 4060TI here is going at $560 here in Serbia, the 7600XT is at $510, while the 7600 is at $430 and 3060 is at $320 on cheaper models. It is an absolutely shambolic market and I reckon a lot of markets will vary ( I hear brazil isn't fun for this sorta shite). 4060Ti is a shit proposition in America yes, but in Europe where it goes for almost $200 cheaper than the 7700XT...It may be a good bargain (here it is $200 cheaper than the 7700XT)
I'm convinced that those who bought the RTX 4060Ti (for gaming) must have been high on something.
😂
High on Nvidia meat
Or - Uneducated on this; don't care; don't know; don't trust AMD; like the brand
Yes,they must have been high on some serious sh*t 😂
@@KJTD It seems like you bought that GPU
For me the choice of Nvidia>AMD is simply because AMD dropped development of Liquid VR and don't work on game Optimizations. Why would I go with the company that has decided to ignore my use case?
Man, as much as I enjoyed my AMD RX 6700 XT, I had to switch to an NVidia 4070 Super for "better" video editing... Still too expensive of a GPU (even though I managed to get it for 440$ second hand). I will gladly switch back to an AMD GPU when they bring some good encoders to the table. Still loving Radeon family.
Just seems to be the way that nvidia is ahead for software, features and overall utility. People who want to save a few dollars and get a few more frames in a game will buy an AMD but overall they are missing out on a full feature set, for instance why would you spend $900 or whatever on a 7900XTX but have terrible performance in RT/PT etc, they will say RT/PT doesn't matter but it definitely does when you spend almost $1000 on a GPU.
You bough a AMD card, then you found out and now you back with Nvidia
@@alanx216 you have some point on RT/PT but usually people buy high end cards for also running at higher resolution, and at 4k, even a 4090 struggles with PT unless you turn on dlss performance and frame gen to get a decent fps.
@@alanx216 and we're in an era where we get frame gen and upscaling to reach high fps, makes much sense because alot of displays are now high hz which feels much better than turning on RT/PT just to dip back to 60fps below
@@paulojamesminimoisaac7858 Put it this way bro buying an AMD is like buying an iPhone with missing features, idk something like the camera only shoots in 240p... I'm not saying AMD cards are bad but for the average joe buying a GPU, they want all the features and it just doesn't make sense to buy something with bad performance when you can get something at a similar price with better overall performance using all features.
Nvidia profile inspector is really good and helps me improve image quality substantially, rtx hdr and hdr and upscaling for UA-cam are a bonus. I am playing on an oled lg c2 42 inch. If AMD improves upscaling, rt and gives hdr software then I will consider switching back to them. There are compromises, no company is perfect.
AMD need better marketing. Also, they should make their naming conventions closer to Nvidia. So average people know which AMD GPU is similar to a specific Nvidia GPU.
hell no! AMD needs better compatibility with NVidia features like CUDA, DLSS.
@@vvhitevvizard_no, native will never compare to an upscale image. Id rather get a good AMD card and run it on native resolution than get a Nvidia card price equivalent and use an upscaler just to get a shittier image quality.
One of the reasons people by Nvidia over AMD is AMD Fanboys. Some will take one look in this very comment section. See how the AMD supporters are acting. And literally choose Nvidia instead. And before you say people don't do that. People actually do that all the time. Just look at the comment sections of other UA-camrs that cover Nvidia and AMD. And one of them is posting this comment right now.
@@TheRealName7 I didn't say DLSS is better than native, but its good to have an option for performance optimization, isn't it?
Nvidia is like Apple in a lot of different ways. Their price to performance is disgustingly bad. I was thinking of buying a new GPU because I've had my current one for little over three years and want to try new games. The problem is that if you want to go for Nvidia you can't get a decent GPU under 700$ unless it's second hand but since I don't like not knowing what someone did with their gpu that checks off. AMD is a beast in my opinion since for around 700$ you can get a brand new 7900 xt which can run most games in 4k and that's what ill be going for. Also I had AMD my whole life starting with the rx 460 to rx 560 and now rx 6600 and I can safely say that I've rarely had any problems with these gpu's. Most people don't understand how they're being scammed by Nvidia to the point that they're paying, in some cases over 2 thousand dollars for a brand new 3090 when there is an AMD graphics card for 70% less that completely wipes the floor with it.
7900xt on sale is a very good price to performance tho still not a budget card, it demolishes anything I throw at it at native 1440p with everything Ultra RT off 120fps+. This card can do one thing well and that's gaming, ppl who buy Nvidia just to play video games are really missing out and paying for Cuda and NVENC they'll never use.
Wrong, I have the $7,900xt. I bought it when it was $900 Plus. Every modern game envelope at 1440p has been at least around 130 FPS give or take. I have also used it while rendering videos at 1440p, hosting a server a private one at that, watching UA-cam with multiple tabs open while talking on Discord. So to sit there and say this card can only do one thing is completely false and shows pure incompetence on what you actually know about it. People actually need to do some research before they spew nonsense. The amount of people in this comment section going AMD bad in the video good just shows how many people stick their head in sand and go la la la.
@@DraconianEssence By reading your comment I can't tell if you have brain damage or what. But can't be bothered either way lol
Im still think that the rx 7900gre is another price to performance legend Like was nvidia gtx 1080ti no joke there cuz you can háve gre IF it is in sale for 500 eur Like damn and 16gb of rám and great performance amazing i hat nvidia gpus allways first was 1050ti later Rtx 2070super after that Rtx 3070 and now rx 7900gre and r7 5800 and im not gonna change back from amd cuz this is amazing gpu and nvidia háve just nothing to offer to me at this point cuz VRAM price and great support of amd really does those new product great Like nvidia really shoukd bé ashamed of them self as company cuz fucking Rtx 4060 is worse than 3060 in many tituls thats just crazy Like People do t want gpu that is power efficient they want power house and Rtx 40 series is anything but power house its more Like brothel cuz its just také your money for moments IF joy but than you realize that in long term this is pretty shit.
Hey Vex you going to do a video on the Amazon prime day deals? Trying to figure out if prebuilts are worth it
"Why is nobody buying AMD card?"
Surely not because they can't do ray tracing and FSR's bad image quality.
Niether can any nshittia 60 series so no excuse
@@roklaca3138 you're a mad coping fanboy
@@schnitzel_enjoyer nope, i have 3060ti, speaking from experience, 60 series are junk for rt
@@schnitzel_enjoyer bro the 60 series are too weak to even run ray tracing, and since they are both 1080p cards using dlss will make it look bad.
@@Azure-hg1rm 60 series is the lowest end nvidia card, do you expect 4090 level ray tracing performance out of it? The fact that 60 series cards beat high end amd cards at ray tracing says a lot.
I have a used 3090 but when buying the card my primary 2 concerns were does it have CUDA and does it have 24gb VRAM. Untill AMD sort out the hot mess that is ROCm then it's not even a competition. So many people on the Llm forums complaining that they got ROCm to work only for it to break a few days later. I really hate that the ONLY choice when buying a GPU at the moment is Nvida but honestly AMD and Intel need to do better.
Why are we asking a question we already know the answer to the AMD Radeon brand is in its last legs it has little to no market share and its mindshare on the basic consumer mind set is practically zilch AMD should know since they had a dead brand with their Athlon and Phenom CPU's/APU's its the reason why they had to rebrand to Ryzen the only issue now is that they only give all their attention to friggen Ryzen after the success of that branding all while Radeon continues to falter which is sad cause Radeon kept them afloat while they got their act together the only reason why SONY and Microsoft used a crappy Bulldoshit CPU on the PS4 and XBOX one was cause AMD could give them a decent GPU along with it at the price they were wiling to pay.
AMD cards definitely are winners in terms of value, but personally I just like my RT and wanna upgrade to 1440p, which is why I'll get a 4070 Super next month, probably the only card in the 40 series lineup that is not dogshit/overpriced.
If AMD cards had better or at the very least comparable RT-Performance I would jump ship immediately.
Most people tho are just completely green-pilled, won't even do the tiniest amount of research of what they actually need for their pc. (Probably the same people who buy overpriced water coolers for a 65 TDP CPU)
The reason why people keep buying Nvidia hardware in my mind is that those GPUs are a fleshed out investment. They do everything and it's only in recent months that AMD has finally got their hardware suitable for streaming, but that still leaves other features on the table for AMD to fully introduce whilst Nvidia already supports them. If you don't need a bunch of features, AMD is considered the cheaper option, which begs the question-WHY do so many people think that they need these features? AMD RDNA 2 and onward will complete most of these tasks already, it should be about time AMD GPUs should be rising.
Most people don't care about 60 and 80fps, it's the same thing. Most people don't play with a frame counter. Most people who play games, they buy graphics card to play games. Most people don't compare graphics cards. They buy only 1 GPU to play games. If people don't have $700 for 4070, they don't buy 4070 at $700. People who have $400 for a graphics card, they buy a $400 graphics card.
I know it's obvious but just letting you know that you don't know ****
AMD has stutter and framedrops in the first 10 minutes after you start a game because of s**t drivers and because they don't know how to solve the shaders problem.
Reviewers and commenters are so disconnected with the reality of the consumer, it baffles me. AMD makes ZERO SENSE for the vast majority of people.
How as the vast majority of people need a decent CPU and GPU that they can play games, and have a dozen chrome tabs open, and be fairly priced.
The average Joe wants to come home from work and game well at high FPS. RT be damned. You want to sacrifice 50% performance to have shiny windows?
My belief on the reason is that it's the latest generation and you get DLSS 3.5 which is worth a lot for some. And some doesn't put their graphics settings to high or max so the VRAM won't get filled up and their gaming experience is likely fine.
But they get raytracing upscaling to 1080p from 680p so they're happy I guess.
I think this could be summed up into : if you are willing to overpay for a better card buy nvidia but if ur on a tight budget and trying to afford all the parts buy from AMD
Nvidia cards support more VR headsets. AMD does not support my Varjo Aero. The 4090 is awesome for this.
@@talon1706VR is for nerds, only a casual gamer likes VR, no real gamer is out here caring for VR
RDNA 4 is just gonna be the RDNA 3.5 that the Ryzen 9000 series will be getting? I mean hey, RDNA 3.5 has actually turned out to be a bigger improvement than we thought by itself, so maybe this won't be so bad. I think they're just biding their time for RDNA 5 to pop off the RX 9900XT while the 8800XT covers their back with effeciency.
cause they think need cuda core, raytracing (sure they looks good) but tanking the performance in entry and mid range GPU , they always talk how streaming and editing video is better on Nvidia which is true but how many % people who own NVIDIA actually use it for making money? my oppinion still stand if you want very high end GPU for editing and streaming or doing complicated physics you didn't have a choice get Nvida, but if you using your GPU for gaming, little bit Editing, little bit 3D rendering ,most of the time microsoft office work and watching movie or listening to music just get an AMD, it will serve you well with lower price.
The another thing - some time ago AMD was a pretty good option for number crunching - more raw power and mem for the same or lower price.
But as non-gaming gpu market has been growing - amd did nothing and became basically useless in most cases. Nvidia was very much interested in pushing CUDA, far before AI and mining booms. When I studied multithreading computing in general and specific GPU computation (like temperature gradients simulations) at uni - we were learning CUDA.
Nvidia was trying to make GPUs something more in gaming with PhysX.
DLSS is basically a side product of their bet on tensor computing and NNs.
Can't say for sure, but with their tendency to broaden their reach outside of gaming - it is probable that their real time ray tracing in gaming is a side product of trying to reach professional render market.
For AMD, on the other hand, Radeon always has been a side hustle. And now, with their success with Ryzen, but still limited resources - it is better for them to focus on CPUs (and, probably, on ARM), where they have a great odds. With GPUs - they are in a much worse place, less chances to get money invested back.
It would be great, if they were pushing their GPUs harder. I'm sick of Nvidia providing borderline usable amount of VRAM in gaming GPUs.
AMD GPUs is only good at gaming, their gpu support on 3D software is just a joke...
For eg, an RX 580 is still a capable card for rendering but amd don't even bother to add HIP support for these older card. Some 3d software like Blender requires amd gpu with HIP support or you can't use your gpu to do the rendering.
What do you even want to render with RX 580 or it's nvidia equivalent?
I recently bought 7900 xtx and run with it things 16Gb 4080 can literally only dream of. I regularly max out all my 24Gb that cost me only $900. It's a steal both for high end gaming and content creation (unless you're building a 24/7 render farm).
"but amd don't even bother to add HIP support for these older card"
Meanwhile, nvidia 10 series that needs DLSS the most gets blocked too (happens to be RX500 generation counterpart). While FSR can easily run on those 10 series just fine.
Why is this constantly brought up in these discussions? When we're talking about what you need for your individual use cases yes, it's definitely worth considering, but NVidia isn't pulling 80% market share because average Joes are all super into 3D rendering and just never talk about it.
We're talking about mass market appeal, 90% of the consumers don't know what CUDA is and most of those that do only know it from that article they saw about how many cores the new card has.
My fucking me. You are actually talking about a 2017 GPU I have in my own pc 😂.
My guy, I don't expect it to do shit in Blender.
@@ValkisCalmorexactly my guy. Most people will never use CUDA, RT or upscaling. Most people just need to do work, browse the web and maybe game here and there.
AMD is a boring company who only makes good CPUs but everything else is yesterday's news. Nvidia is pioneering (if what they're pioneering is shit - then why does AMD follow every footstep?) and people at least get excited a tiny bit when buying Nvidia. And ofc there's fact that Nvidia is more stable and works better with professional software like 3d renderers. So basically pros and people who have no clue buy Nvidia, and only geeks buy AMD. Still, I'm gonna be buying Arc.
The reason why we buy Nvidia and will always buy nvidia is their drivers. Thats it. all your promotion of AMD means nothing because as soon as someone is gullible enough to waste money on an AMD GPU only to discover that it is broken and they have to spend hours trouble shooting it only to find theres no fix for their game and then they switch to nvidia and its just plug&play without issues and you understand why people would spend 1000$ on a 4060ti before they would buy an AMD card. Benchmarks mean nothing they are just arbitrary numbers on a screen. I need a GPU that functions correctly without issues and I have been burned no less than SIX TIMES by the AMD cards that I have bought over the years. Never again.
I dont want to pay 2X or 3X more for a GPU than i have to but My choice is buy a working GPU or a broken GPU.
i have had amd gpu and cpu my whole life and you're right, i would probably buy an nvidia for my next card.
All this talk about AMD drivers being bad seems horribly outdated too me.
I switched too amd end of 2020 with a rx570 8gb i bought of from a friend that has used it for like 3 weeks but found a good offer for a 6000series, i didnt make a conscious decision of switching too amd i just did it cuz he gave me the opportunity and i knew my gtx960 4gb was outdated.
I never had a single driver issue with that card, recently bought a whole new rig with a 7900gre threw half my steam catalogue at it and still didnt encounter any issues.
Only problem i had with amd was my new am5 based MB having USB issues under high performance games but i managed too fix that within 10mins.
@@stevenostrowski6552 i dont think it's outdated. when nvidia just works and amd is working most of the time, it's still frustrating as a gamer
I've brought a lot and advised people to buy Nvidia cards (in the triple figures) over the years. Since my first Geforce 256 DDR, as a system builder for others and my own house hold. Currently running RX580 and RX5700XT with no driver issues. I've watched Nvidia get greedy over of the years. This has played AMD hand to also jack up pricing which is bad for those that buy and use GPU cards.
On Linux, it is the opposite situation where AMD drivers are plug and play on Linux while Nvidia drivers aren't as good(but I have heard that they are improving with the 560 nvidia driver).
1. There is no choice. 2. This new gen of PC gamers have no context on pc pricing in general. 10 Years ago I would have never paid over 200 for high-end RAM, or over 300 for a motherboard. Graphics cards is also just a sin that nvidia continues to commit.
Of course there's a choice.
To choose worse that's for sure!
Ahhh aren't gonna mention power efficiency at all ?
Mostly cheap prebuilt OEM build sales Vex. Probably a price sensitive purchase at the online retail and box stores or a technical and practical issue with system builders/Corporations with cheap bulk lower wattage PSU's. I'm actually surprised about how many people don't care or understand what performance they have in their systems. Marketing is strong with this one. Thanks for your thoughts and analysis Vex! Peace!
AMD fanboys make a lot of noise on UA-cam, they have to justify their purchase, the rest just play games lol
ok, then how do nvidia fanboys justify paying more for the same performance? dont get me wrong, I was a nvidia fanboy, but for 600$ my 7800xt is as good as the 4070, which was 25% more expensive
EDIT: meant to say 7800xt, not 6800xt, mb
@@Laur352 6800 XT 50% more power consumption, DLSS 3.5, even AMD Antilag+ is only supported by RDNA3, not RDNA2
@@Laur352 turn on raytracing then what... You will say RT doesn't matter but it definitely does when you spend $600 on a GPU.
@@ThePgR777 still doesn't explain why gamers bought the 1050ti instead of the RX6600. where you typically pay more for Nvidia for less performance. As for power saving Unless you're testing at the wall reported power use is not accurate and the amount of actual money saved over the average GPU ownership period is less than any upfront cost when upgrading. I had a choice between a 4060 and an RX6800...I got the RX6800 undervolted it under 200watts and get more FPS with native resolution compared to the GPU with DLSS...
@@alanx216 rtx does not matter, it's just eye candy good for showcasing games. it does not help gameplay. racing games, dont need raytracing, shooters, dont need raytracing, strategy games, mobas, mmorpgs, none of them need raytracing. Raytracing is like having racing lines on a normal car, it looks nice, but it doesnt make it faster
EDIT: and at 600$ you get either 7800xt that can use all 16gb of vram, or a 4060 ti with 16gb but not enough bus memory to use all 16Gigs at once on any game
I've been a green boy since the 8800GTX which was insanely good at running Crysis. I had the 1070, the 1080ti and the 3070 after. But the 3070 felt so limited with only 8gb for such a good die I felt a little robbed.
With gpu prices being so absurd I went with the RX7900GRE and couldn't be happier. Team red drivers are much much better than when I tried the RX580 , I had zero issues with mine so far. Even with OC.
Adrenaline drivers aren't perfect yet , but nvidia drivers also took a dive since the rtx3000, I had some odd small issues with my 3070.
Don't forget, that the most popular GPU is the 7800 XT in Germany.
Yeah its like almost half and half here, don't know why. They strong nvidia bias seems to be mostly Murican.
@@Spicysauced Nvidia is also very common in internet cafes, which inflate the stats in steam hardware surveys.
The Germans love to support the underdog and in case of amd cpus it actually even worked quite well.
No dlss + no rtx
Dear @@R-Endanger ,
DLSS is not supported i very game and it is a fake thing. It iss better to set the game to 1080 p on a 4K monitor. On a 1440P it is a big problem. That is not a good resolution. And Frame Gen wisse is AMD a lot better, than nvidia but those are also fake frames. So these SW realted things are just cheatings. SSo I would better use 1080P native. Maybe with frame gen, if the frames are high enough for that (240 FPS) becausse of it causes bigger latency.
rtx is still a joke. Only 4090 is good for that but still a lot worse, than without it. Most of the people use higher FPS, than rtx. On my opinion we still have to wait 2 generations for good rtx/path tracing, which is lot better, than rtx. There are some comparisons about it in cyberpunk.
But everybody does with their money, what they want. If they want the best card, they will buy a 4090. If they want a good price/perf card, they will buy 7800 XT, or 7900 GRE, maybe 7900 XT. 7700 XT has only 12 GB of VRAM. And for cheaper solutions there is 6800 non XT, 6700/XT, or 6600/XT and 7600, hese are all good cards for that price.
I’ve been looking at building my first PC and you couldn’t PAY me to run any 4060. I have been looking at an AMD card (RX 7900 XT) and really Nvidia wasn’t even on my radar… and still, even today, the only card from Nvidia in my current price point that I would consider at all is the RTX 4070 TI Super. I would like to say that the only reason I’m even considering the 4070 TI Super is because of you, Vex, because you made a good point about buying such a high end card and just not getting all the features (like Ray/Path Tracing and DLSS.) So thanks for making my decision harder!
Its because people hear 'DLSS' and 'FRAME GEN' and 'RTX' and..... '8GB OF VRAM' and then people proceed to cream their pants.
Also the more we judge things in pure raster the harder it is for Nvidia to deceive us with AI tricks and force them to make anything else but their enthusiast class halo products have actual meaningful performance gains.
Been a long time nvidia guy from the 750 to 1070 and 3060 and I recently got a 7900xt I have to say it actually is good for what I payed for I can run 1440p max setting on all games except tarkov because it’s unoptimized
I bought a 4060 because it was the cheapest card I could find at best buy, and it's much better than my old
GTX 1060 6GB. I have a cousin who works in tech that told me to avoid AMD's GPUs since he says that most of the time whenever someone comes in with a GPU problem, it's an AMD one
One thing that I've noticed is while 4060 Desktop seemed like a bad value for money or Desktop side, The laptop variant of the card seemed really good for the budget and it's literally the 3rd most popular in the steam hardware survey
actually can't believe how cheap amd cards are now
They're dominating in the low and mid range. No way in hell was I going to get an RTX 4060 over an RX 6750 XT for $300 a few weeks ago, I already consistently use over 8gb of VRAM in many games.
I'd buy amd GPUs if they had more capable cards but they don't. I don't use my gpus for just gaming, I use them for gaming, rendering and local AI. So basically buying an AMD card is buying something with 1/3 of the of the functionality for my use.
RTX 4060 ti 16gb , i love it for ai, gaming coming from a 1070
sorry to say that is one of the most disastrous GPU probably in a decade
the low/mid range of nvidia is fcked
@@A1mb0t_Fr0z3n7600 XT 16 gb was a disaster not the 4060 ti 16 lol
4060 ti 16 can easily do ray tracing with Dlss and FG but your shitty 7600 or even a 7800xt can't even with fsr FG
And also fsr looks 🤢 like this at the moment
@@Fronioll9973 yup i don't understand the hate. Plus a lot of people seems to forgot that gpus don't have the same price in every country.... In France that was a good deal
@@Arthur-jg4ji yeah they think everyone lives in usa lol
Amd is better (obviously) but they do need to make themselves a good reputation.
bro do u know Internet Cafe or PC bang around the world??? that's the answer ur question why so many buy it' its for business
i recently bought 4060 ti 16gb by myself on self, i was upgrading from 1050 2GB so im happy, im a teenager and im enjoying my new graphics card
Because AMD is trash.
Youre part of the problem. You get hooked by nvidia marketing, loosing sense of reality.
Your name tells it.
Good points, my reason to get the 4060 is power consumption. Just that, by all the other metrics is mediocre at best, but power consumption costs money and running a gamming pc where I live costs about 40-60 dollars a month in electricity mid use for actually gaming.
people shifting to AMD now.
wait for 2 years, it will show amd having 40%
RDNA3 has been a failure. I constantly hear about driver instability issues. Every 3 months theres another Driver debacle like Anti Lag+.
Thats not even including the complete and miserable failure of FSR. Their framegen is nice but the upscaler cant even compete with Intels XeSS.
Its not hard to see why Radeon is failing, and contrary to every AMD fanboy, consumers are smart enough to pick up on that. Its not brain rot, its savvy shoppers understanding Radeon is not a good bet.
FSR sucks but drivers have been incredible going on for a year now since switching to AMD.
@@tmsphere happy for you. But that doesn’t mean anything for consistency. On the whole, driver issues have been a constant issue for Radeon. Whether it be something as broad as Ratchet and Clank having RT disabled for Radeon, or driver timeout and black screen issues.
Just because you haven’t been affected doesn’t mean these issues don’t exist. For instance, just because you don’t play CS2 and didn’t get banned when you turned on AL+ doesn’t mean others didn’t.