7900xtx or 4080

[Shortcut]

I got myself in a weird position I promised my grandson my 3080 FTW video card when I can get a 7900XTX or a 4090. I found an XFX Merc310 7900XTX 24gb for list price and ordered it which is the same price as the Nivida reference 4080 card now It seems 7900’s are not living up to expectations.

I don’t know what to get the XFS Merc310 7900XTX 24gb or grab a 4080 which are pretty available now I refuse to pay $2000.00 plus for a 4090.

I play 95% simulations in VR like DCS, X-Plane 11 & 12, MFSFS 2020, F1-22 and some others. One thing that I like on the 7900’s is the 2.1 display port I think the next generation of VR headsets will most likely be going with it.

Any advice or help will be appreciated  

[dburne]

4080.

[Hartsblade]

1 hour ago, dburne said:

4080.

As much I like AMD, I have to agree. While the two cards have over all similar performance, nvidia does a superior job with VR. Hopefully some day AMD will take a look at VR and make some improvements. 

[Shortcut]

I Just put in a order for a MSI - NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 16GB GAMING X TRIO from Best buy or would the 4080 Fe be just as good. $109 price difference for the MSI

[MadKreator]

I love my 4080 FE , I have no regrets buying it. I came from a 3080xc and the 4080 obliterates it lol DCS still has many more bottlenecks which don’t yield as good of performance increase as other games, as of right now. But it did improve nonetheless. fs2020, cod, battlefield etc I saw huge gains in performance in pancake and VR. 

You wont go wrong with either.. you play a bit more for different cooling solutions, more lighting, and maybe a bit of overclock, which you can do with msi afterburner anyway, to any card, if you feel so inclined.

with my quest2 , although not the greatest, I can just put fs2020 on high-end with dlss OFF in vr and its very smooth and looks great, large cities being the exception and heavily lit night time. Of course on a quest you cant see much difference between high and medium anyway. But the 4080 really brought vr to life for me. I still prefer dcs in pancake with my widescreen and helios though.

Edited January 1, 2023 by MadKreator

[WipeUout]

4080.

I did the switch from a 6900XT.  It was a good card but AMD's support for VR is not on par with Nvidia, particularly for Pimax HMDs.   The 4080 is providing me better compatibility and also improved image quality for contrast and black levels.  Joining the green team cost more but the 4080 is cheaper than a 3090Ti for 15% more performance!  The FPS performance increase for DCS from the 6900xt to the 4080 is about 31% using SteamVR.  I paid $1450 for my 4080 which is about the same price as a 7900XTX on amazon.

 

[metzger]

4080 all day. 7900xtx seems to fail miserably in VR and it also seems to have overheating problems. 4080 is overall better card for almost the same money. 7900xtx can only compare to 4080 in a few AAA crap and that only assuming it will not overheat..

I just jumperd from 1080ti to 4080 and the improvement is about 300-350%. 

Edited January 2, 2023 by metzger

[Shortcut]

Being I only do VR I decided to cancel the 7900XTX and keep the MSI 4080 Trio on order if I can find a 4090 I'll  cancel the 4080. Might as well go for broke wife's not happy.

Again thanks for the help

[Wali763]

Has anyone tested the 7900xtx here or is it all pure speculation?

My 6800xt is working well in VR. Dont know what my experience would be on a (compareable NV) 3080 though. Last Nvidia gpu I owned was a 2070S.

But I dont know, why a 7900 should work worse than my 6800xt? Yrs, Amd did not deliver the promised 50+% uplift across all games over the 6950, but isnt 40% more fps fine too?

Im not here to defend Amd and probably would (to be on the safe side) recommend Nvidia to a friend, but many answers here seem to just repeat old stereotyps with no personal experience....

Other than compatibiliy (Varjo, Pimax?), what would change for me going to Nvidia? Only I could think of is better reprojection.

 

BTW: Im not gonna give Nvidia 1400e for a product that cost 700e (at least should have according to Nvidia) last gen. 

Edited January 4, 2023 by Wali763

[unlikely_spider]

20 minutes ago, Wali763 said:

BTW: Im not gonna give Nvidia 1400e for a product that cost 700e (at least should have according to Nvidia) last gen. 

I'm usually excited by new gpu releases, but these prices this gen are extremely hard to swallow

Especially compared to the MSRP that I paid for my 3080FE when it came out.

[Hartsblade]

1 hour ago, Wali763 said:

Has anyone tested the 7900xtx here or is it all pure speculation?

My 6800xt is working well in VR. Dont know what my experience would be on a (compareable NV) 3080 though. Last Nvidia gpu I owned was a 2070S.

But I dont know, why a 7900 should work worse than my 6800xt? Yrs, Amd did not deliver the promised 50+% uplift across all games over the 6950, but isnt 40% more fps fine too?

Im not here to defend Amd and probably would (to be on the safe side) recommend Nvidia to a friend, but many answers here seem to just repeat old stereotyps with no personal experience....

Other than compatibiliy (Varjo, Pimax?), what would change for me going to Nvidia? Only I could think of is better reprojection.

 

BTW: Im not gonna give Nvidia 1400e for a product that cost 700e (at least should have according to Nvidia) last gen. 

 

I love my 6900xt and with price what they are it looks like I will be holding on to it a bit longer.  That said if money was no object and I was upgrading I would have to go with a 4080 or 4090 for VR based on previous performance disparities between nvidia and amd when I comes to VR performance.  If I was looking for pancake gaming then I would be looking at 7900xtx partner cards like an Asus TUF oc.

One of the few sites that does testing of GPU'S and VR has this to say...

https://babeltechreviews.com/hellhound-rx-7900-xtx-vs-rtx-4080-50-games-vr/

[nikoel]

2 hours ago, Wali763 said:

Has anyone tested the 7900xtx here or is it all pure speculation?

My 6800xt is working well in VR. Dont know what my experience would be on a (compareable NV) 3080 though. Last Nvidia gpu I owned was a 2070S.

But I dont know, why a 7900 should work worse than my 6800xt? Yrs, Amd did not deliver the promised 50+% uplift across all games over the 6950, but isnt 40% more fps fine too?

Im not here to defend Amd and probably would (to be on the safe side) recommend Nvidia to a friend, but many answers here seem to just repeat old stereotyps with no personal experience....

Other than compatibiliy (Varjo, Pimax?), what would change for me going to Nvidia? Only I could think of is better reprojection.

 

BTW: Im not gonna give Nvidia 1400e for a product that cost 700e (at least should have according to Nvidia) last gen. 

 

In DCS, as things currently stand they have regressed. My 6900XT (which has been OC'd to the tits but is over 2 years old) outperforms and wipes the floor with the 7900XTX.

Reading between the lines, and looking at the performance on Linux () it might be driver related. In the long term there might be an update that will bring it in line with the promises AMD has made. In the long run we are all also dead.

AMD done fuuuu up this time around. I will link the chart at the bottom. What it doesn't quite capture are the frametime spikes, graph of which resembles Apache's Rotor RPM during takeoff roll on your average DCS multiplayer server 

If you want some first hand accounts of 7900XTX in DCS read this: https://discord.com/channels/610534461456777257/771045059104735243 - we really did throw the kitchen sink at it

(For the record, I run everything on high except for shadows - low, terrain shadows - default, MSAAx2, and Clouds - Standard. 100% Resolution with OpenXR at 55FPS locked)

Edited January 4, 2023 by nikoel

[Wali763]

7 minutes ago, nikoel said:

In DCS, as things currently stand they have regressed. My 6900XT (which has been OC'd to the tits but is over 2 years old) outperforms and wipes the floor with the 7900XTX. Frametime spikes are out of this world

Reading between the lines, and looking at the performance on Linux () it might be driver related. In the long term there might be an update that will bring it in line with the promises AMD has made. In the long run we all also dead.

AMD done fuuuu up this time around

If you want some first hand accounts of 7900XTX in DCS read this: https://discord.com/channels/610534461456777257/771045059104735243 - we really did throw the kitchen sink at it

(For the record, I run everything on high except for shadows - low, terrain shadows - default, MSAAx2, and Clouds - Standard. 100% Resolution with OpenXR at 55FPS locked)

 

Thx for the valuable info.

[Rifter]

2 hours ago, Wali763 said:

Only I could think of is better reprojection.

Well, for some people reprojection performance is the one and only decision factor.
My 6900 XT was not working well in VR - so I switched to a 3090. Although I would have loved to be able to use the 6900 for several reasons.
The big question is: Did AMD crank up the video decoder performance for the 7xxx-generation or not. That alone determines the VR reprojection performance because motion estimation relies on video decoder functionality. And rumours say that Nvidia 30xx cards have a performance advantage by the factor of 2 to 3 over AMD 6xxx cards regarding the video decoder.

[Supmua]

I would avoid AMD’s latest GPUs for now at least until they manage to sort things out. 

 

[Oellness]

Anyone tried a 7900XTX yet?

[whisky.actual]

I've got mine a week ago, currently trying to tune the settings, I was on a GTX 1070 so it was a big step-up for me. I can run everything on high but my frames seems to be capped around 30-40 on the ground and I can achieve the 50-60 in the air (using OpenXR). I am running the Odyssey+ with a AMD Ryzen 5600X, 32 gig of DDR4 ram. Heat-wise I am around 75-80c on the Junction temperature, my model does not suffer from some of the issues that was published online. Motion Reprojection does not work do, when I turn it on I get locked around 19-27 frames and my GPU utilization is stuck around 85%. I guess drivers still need work. I will keep you guys posted. I would be interested to know if other players have tried also to tweak their setup.

[Shortcut]

Well I kind of changed everything I had the 13600K which worked really good but last week I found a 13700k for $50 more so I returned the 13600K also found a Gigabyte 4090 OC for list price so I went for it. I only had the 13700k in for one day biggest difference I notice is it's faster and cooler then the 13600k when the 13600 is over clocked. I can run DCS using my G2 headset  at 100% with maxed out settings and get 60 + FPS also noticed less shimmering on the ground when doing a barrel roll everything seems a little smother or it's just me. Wondering if DCS has a 60 FPS limit for VR but so far things are good now on to X-Plane 12 and MSFS.

Edited January 30, 2023 by Shortcut

[Hartsblade]

On 1/2/2023 at 3:21 AM, WipeUout said:

4080.

I did the switch from a 6900XT.  It was a good card but AMD's support for VR is not on par with Nvidia, particularly for Pimax HMDs.   The 4080 is providing me better compatibility and also improved image quality for contrast and black levels.  Joining the green team cost more but the 4080 is cheaper than a 3090Ti for 15% more performance!  The FPS performance increase for DCS from the 6900xt to the 4080 is about 31% using SteamVR.  I paid $1450 for my 4080 which is about the same price as a 7900XTX on amazon.

 

Just made the same switch a few days ago and very happy I did. The increase in performance was well worth it.

On side note. I picked up a "used" Asus Tuf 4080 OC from B&H for $1200 ($100 less then my Asus Tuf  6900 xt OC 2 years ago). I know that "used" can be a scary word,  but B&H dose an excellent job of inspecting and rating used equipment. The card was rate a 10 on a scale of 0-10, when the card arrived it was obvious that someone had bought it, opened the box, took the GPU out of the anti-static bag, and never installed it. All of the factory plastic wrap was still on the card and intact. The power adapter was still sealed in it's bag. If I had to hazard a guess, they took the card out of the anti-static bag, discovered it was probably too big for their case and returned it. Either way, the card works like a charm.

Edited January 30, 2023 by Hartsblade
Typo

[Shortcut]

After installing the 4090 I noticed my WIFI signal was doping from 5 bars to 2 it was driving me nuts I replace the motherboard antennas with a wired one about 2 feet from the PC now I have constant 5 bars. I first noticed when playing

MSFS figured I'd pass this on.

Edited January 30, 2023 by Shortcut

[WipeUout]

17 hours ago, Hartsblade said:

Just made the same switch a few days ago and very happy I did. The increase in performance was well worth it.

On side note. I picked up a "used" Asus Tuf 4080 OC from B&H for $1200 ($100 less then my Asus Tuf  6900 xt OC 2 years ago). I know that "used" can be a scary word,  but B&H dose an excellent job of inspecting and rating used equipment. The card was rate a 10 on a scale of 0-10, when the card arrived it was obvious that someone had bought it, opened the box, took the GPU out of the anti-static bag, and never installed it. All of the factory plastic wrap was still on the card and intact. The power adapter was still sealed in it's bag. If I had to hazard a guess, they took the card out of the anti-static bag, discovered it was probably too big for their case and returned it. Either way, the card works like a charm.

Happy you had a good experience with a used(not much) GPU.  I was not so lucky before getting the 4080 when I tried to get a cheap ''refrubished'' 3090Ti from eBay.  The card was completely dead, not even fans turning when powering on.  They did reimbursed 100% plus shipping cost to get it back but after this episode, I went for a new GPU.  Did you noticed any image quality improvement over the AMD card?

 

Edited January 31, 2023 by WipeUout

[WipeUout]

19 hours ago, whisky.actual said:

I've got mine a week ago, currently trying to tune the settings, I was on a GTX 1070 so it was a big step-up for me. I can run everything on high but my frames seems to be capped around 30-40 on the ground and I can achieve the 50-60 in the air (using OpenXR). I am running the Odyssey+ with a AMD Ryzen 5600X, 32 gig of DDR4 ram. Heat-wise I am around 75-80c on the Junction temperature, my model does not suffer from some of the issues that was published online. Motion Reprojection does not work do, when I turn it on I get locked around 19-27 frames and my GPU utilization is stuck around 85%. I guess drivers still need work. I will keep you guys posted. I would be interested to know if other players have tried also to tweak their setup.

Difficult to assess if your performance is where it should be.  What map, airplane, mission are you using?  What are your DCS, NVCP, SteamVR (or OpenXR) settings?  A lot of variables can influence performance.  Also, are you monitoring your CPU/GPU frame-times?  This can help tremendously to guide you, fpsVR for SteamVR is a good tool for that and if you are using OpenXR, there is an option to display this info as well.

[Hartsblade]

5 hours ago, WipeUout said:

Happy you had a good experience with a used(not much) GPU.  I was not so lucky before getting the 4080 when I tried to get a cheap ''refrubished'' 3090Ti from eBay.  The card was completely dead, not even fans turning when powering on.  They did reimbursed 100% plus shipping cost to get it back but after this episode, I went for a new GPU.  Did you noticed any image quality improvement over the AMD card?

 

 

B&H out of NYC is a long time electronics store specializing in camera equipment. They have an excellent reputation and really seem to take their used market seriously. Everything gets inspected and tested if need be before it is listed.

As far as noticing an image quality improvement, I want to say yes, but that could be a "placebo effect". Colors seem deeper as do blacks, and general game performance seems smoother overall.