AMD Radeon RX 6800 series graphics cards have serious 4K cred

AMD Radeon RX 6800 series graphics cards have serious 4K cred

AMD is finally going after 4K gaming with its impressive top-end PC graphics cards, the Radeon RX 6800 and 6800 XT (and 6900 XT) after spending its time concentrating on value buyers. Its still-current RX 5700 XT was formerly the top of the line and designed for 1440p play, though I expect AMD will bring the rest of the Radeon cards up to date with the latest technologies. All the new cards incorporate the RDNA 2.0 architecture that's in the graphics processing units for the upcoming Xbox Series X and S and PS5 consoles and directly tackle the new Ampere-architecture GeForce RTX 3080 and 3070 recently launched by Nvidia. 

The RX 6800 and its higher-end sibling, the RX 6800 XT, fall between the Nvidia cards in performance and price -- at least by manufacturer price. The $579 (directly converted: £435, AU$790) RX 6800 falls between the $499 (£375, AU$680) RTX 3070 and the $699 (£525, AU$960) RTX 3080, while the $649 (£490, AU$890) RX 6800 XT competes almost directly with the RTX 3080. Actual prices can vary a lot, however, depending on stock and the "something extra" that third-party card makers throw into the mix, so they're frequently higher than AMD and Nvidia's explicit target. The new cards are available as of today.

So far I'm impressed with the performance of both of the 6800 cards, but exactly how impressed will depend upon where the prices land when the market has settled. They both hit eminently playable 4K frame rates and that's before you start futzing with driver settings like overclocking and upscaling with FidelityFX, AMD's open-source image quality toolkit. When the cards are maxing out the graphics processing unit, the fans can get loud, but they never get too hot or unstable. (I never pushed them to the point where I'd expect them to, though.)  

The Radeon RX 6800 (top) and RX 6800 XT (bottom).

Lori Grunin/CNET

Physically, the 6800 is narrower than the 6800 XT, and both are longer than Nvidia's RTX 3070 (but shorter than the RTX 3080). The three fans suck air in from the side and blow it out through the top and bottom; there's no venting out of the back as there is on the RTX cards. They use standard eight-pin power connectors and provide an HDMI, two DisplayPorts and a USB-C port.

The Radeon RX 6800 cards are on the long side, and I don't think I'd try to cram one into a small system.

Lori Grunin/CNET

Hardware performance improvements over previous generations stem partly from the higher-density on-die Infinity Cache design (all have 128MB) and enhanced design of the compute units, which includes a new Ray Accelerator core for each compute unit. These combine to improve the memory subsystem by reducing the latency of moving data around, increase bandwidth by up to 2.2x with a narrower path (256 bits) and deliver better energy efficiency. That also allows the processors to hit higher clock frequencies without a substantial increase in power requirements.    

Specifications

	AMD Radeon RX 6800	AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT
Memory	16GB DDR6	16GB DDR6
Memory bandwidth (GB/sec)	512	512
Memory clock (GHz)	2.0	2.0
GPU clock (GHz, base/boost)	1.815/2.105	2.015/2.250
Memory data rate/Interface	16Gbps/256 bit	16Gbps/256 bit
Texture fill rate (gigatexels per second)	505.2	648
Ray Accelerators	60	72
Stream cores	3,840	4,608
Texture mapping units	240	288
Compute Units	60	72
TGP/min PSU (watts)	250/650	300/750
Bus	PCIe 4.0 x 16	PCIe 4.0 x 16
Size	2 slots; 10.5 in/267mm long	2.5 slots; 10.5 in/267mm long
Price	$579	$649

Relative performance between the AMD and Nvidia cards seems to be mixed across the board as well. (It'll require a lot more testing to confirm the patterns I'm seeing.) There's a significantly smaller gap between the 6800 XT and 6800 and Nvidia's cards at 4K than at 1080p, for example, which is more than likely due to their 16GB of memory (the 3080 has 10GB) and the Infinity Cache. 

You generally don't take much of a hit going from 1080p to 1440p with AMD's cards. For instance, on Shadow of the Tomb Raider the 6800 XT dropped from 140fps to 132fps on average. The details look different, though. I noticed more reliance on the central processing unit and less consistency in the amount of time it takes to render a frame in 1440p. On the Deus Ex: Mankind Divided benchmark, the AMD cards dropped less than 3% from 1080p to 1440p. The RTX 3070 and 3080 lost about 20%.

The Radeon RX 6800.

Lori Grunin/CNET

The AMD cards also hit higher graphic processing unit clock rates for DirectX 12 calls than for DirectX 11. The GPU clock frequencies -- memory and instruction -- also vary a lot more relative to each other. By comparison, the 3070's frequencies are in lockstep. Much of this may be driver-related since AMD's driver makes more automatic on-the-fly adjustments. The behavior isn't necessarily a bad thing, just different.

There's an optimized all-AMD configuration, which takes advantage of the cards' new Smart Access Memory. SAM basically gives the card direct access to the main system memory across the system bus, rather than having to use the central processing unit as a middle man. But that's only in systems using one of the company's new Ryzen 5000 series of desktop CPUs, and AMD says it only boosts frame rates by up to 13%. I haven't had a chance to try it for want of a motherboard and CPU, though.

Between the new consoles and the barrage of graphics cards, this is an exhausting -- or exhilarating, take your pick -- time to shop for new gaming gear, especially gear that likely won't see a Black Friday discount this holiday shopping season. Toss in the supply problems we've been seeing for consoles and graphics cards, and you've got plenty of time to make a decision. As long as the prices don't get too high, or Nvidia's don't get too low, AMD's enthusiast gaming GPUs are more competitive than they've ever been.

Far Cry 5 (1080p)

MSI Aegis RS (6800 XT)

Note:

NOTE: Longer bars indicate better performance (FPS)

Far Cry 5 (4K)

Note:

NOTE: Longer bars indicate better performance (fps)

Shadow of the Tomb Raider gaming test (4K)

MSI Aegis RS (RTX 3070)

Origin PC Chronos (RTX 3080)

Note:

Longer bars indicate better performance (FPS)

3DMark Time Spy

MSI Aegis RS (RTX 3070)

MSI Aegis RS (6800 XT)

Origin PC Chronos (RTX 3080)

Note:

NOTE: Longer bars indicate better performance

3DMark Fire Strike Ultra

MSI Aegis RS (RTX 3070)

Origin PC Chronos (RTX 3080)

MSI Aegis RS (6800 XT)

Note:

Longer bars indicate better performance

SpecViewPerf 13 3DS Max (1080p)

MSI Aegis RS (RTX 3070)

MSI Aegis RS (6800)

Origin PC Chronos (RTX 3080)

MSI Aegis RS (6800 XT)

Note:

Longer bars indicate better performance (FPS)

Configurations

MSI Aegis RS (RTX 3070 FE)	Microsoft Windows 10 Home (1909); 3.8GHz Intel Core i7-10700K; 16GB DDR4 SDRAM 3,000; 8GB Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070 Founders Edition; 1TB SSD
Origin PC Chronos (RTX 3080)	Microsoft Windows 10 Home (2004); Intel Core i9-10900K; 16GB DDR4 SDRAM 3,200; 10GB Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080 (EVGA); 1TB SSD + 500GB SSD
MSI Aegis RS (RX 6800 XT)	Microsoft Windows 10 Home (1909); 3.8GHz Intel Core i7-10700K; 16GB DDR4 SDRAM 3,000; 16GB AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT; 1TB SSD
MSI Aegis RS (RX 6800)	Microsoft Windows 10 Home (1909); 3.8GHz Intel Core i7-10700K; 16GB DDR4 SDRAM 3,000; 16GB AMD Radeon RX 6800; 1TB SSD

---

Source

Tags:

• Amd Radeon Rx 6800 Series Graphics Cards Have Serious 4k Pictures
• Amd Radeon Rx 6800 Series Graphics Cards Have Serious 4k Projector
• Amd Radeon Rx 6800 Series Graphics Cards Have Serious Fun
• Amd Radeon Rx 6800 Series Graphics Cards Have S erious Liquidity
• Amd Radeon Rx 6800 Series Graphics Card
• Amd Radeon Rx 6800 Series Graphics Test
• Amd Radeon Rx 6800 Series Graphicsgale
• Amd Radeon Rx 6800m
• Amd Radeon Rx 6600
• Amd Radeon Rx Vega 56
• Amd Radeon Drivers
• Amd Radeon Rx 6700 Xt

Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070 gaming graphics card is a speedy compromise for $499

Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070 gaming graphics card is a speedy compromise for $499

Nvidia's GeForce RTX 3070 may end up suffering from middle-child syndrome, squeezed between the two ends of Nvidia's GPU spectrum: basic 1440p for a little less or basic 4K/high-frame rate 1440p for a little more. The GeForce RTX 3070 Founders Edition of the $499 (£469, AU$809) graphics card I tested is geared toward high-frame rate/quality 1440p gaming, and delivers similar performance to the RTX 2080 Ti for most uses (but not all), which debuted at $999. The boost over its predecessor, the more expensive RTX 2070 Super, depends upon what you need it to do. 

The release of the 3070 follows the bumpy launch of the $699 RTX 3080 and its $1,500 sibling, the RTX 3090, both experiencing price gouging due to shortages. But rumors have also surfaced about a slightly cheaper RTX 3060 Ti coming soon as well as a new card slotted between the 3070 and 3080. Plus, it's likely we'll get an entry-level 30 series card early next year to feed the mid-$300 buyers. And that doesn't take into account AMD's launch of its ambitious Radeon RX 6000-series "Big Navi" gaming cards that use the same architecture as the upcoming Xbox Series X and S and PS5consoles.

Like the RTX 3080-based graphics cards, the Ampere-generation of the company's GPU architecture achieves playable frame rates in games that use RTX-specific features like ray-tracing and global illumination. Its AI-based upscaling feature, DLSS, lets you finally game at better-than-bare-minimum frame rates without visible degradation in quality. The GPU also lifts performance over predecessors in games that don't take advantage of the whizzy features by about 10% to 20% on average, which is really most games.   

Unlike its higher-end siblings, the 3070 uses older GDDR6 memory and has the same memory bandwidth as the 2070 Super. It still gets some performance boosts thanks to the second-gen ray tracing and third-gen Tensor cores, such as new algorithms and instruction sets that make them a lot more efficient and a switch to an 8nm process size from 12nm. And as is typical, it has increased core counts -- it has a lower ray-tracing core count but the Ampere RT cores are doubled-up over the Turing cores, so technically the 3070 has more. But you won't see the same uplift that the 3080 and 3090 received over earlier models. 

Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070 Founders Edition specs

	GeForce RTX 3070
Memory	8GB GDDR6
Memory bandwidth	448GB/sec
Memory clock (GHz)	1.75
GPU clock (GHz, base/boost)	1.5/1.73
Memory data rate/Interface	14Gbps/256 bit
Texture fill rate (gigatexels per second)	317.4
RT cores	46
CUDA Cores	5,888
Texture mapping units	184
Streaming multiprocessors	68
Tensor Cores	184
Process	8nm
TGP/min PSU	220w/550w
Max thermal (degrees C)	199F/93C
GPU name	GA104
Bus	PCIe 4.0 x 16
Size	2 slots; 9.5 x 4.4 in (242 x 112 mm)
Price	Around $499

It's also significantly less power-hungry than the higher-end cards, roughly the same as before, plus it's the same size as the 2080 Ti. While the 3070 has a similar 12-pin power connector design to the 3080 -- including an adapter in the box -- it still only connects to a single 8-pin block from the power supply. All of that means it's a much simpler upgrade, especially in tight systems. The Founders Edition, at least, ran cool and quiet during my testing, in a system where I swapped it for the 2070 Super.  

Lori Grunin/CNET

I have no complaints about the RTX 3070's performance, and it's definitely worth its $499 price tag. But it may not be your best choice for the money. The Ti models generally have more memory and slightly wider data paths than the non-Ti models, which is why you'll find the 11GB 2080 Ti occasionally outperforming the 8GB 3070. It makes sense to wait and see if an RTX 3060 Ti or intermediate option between the 3070 and 3080 become reality and what AMD rolls out later this week.

Geekbench 5 (Vulkan)

Origin PC Big O (PS4 Edition)

MSI Aegis RS (MS-7C75)

Corsair One Pro i200

Note:

Longer bars indicate better performance

Geekbench 5 (CUDA)

Note:

Longer bars indicate better performance

Shadow of the Tomb Raider gaming test (1080p, highest quality)

Origin PC Big O (PS4 Edition)

MSI Aegis RS (MS-7C75)

Note:

Longer bars indicate better performance (FPS)

Shadow of the Tomb Raider gaming test (4K, highest quality)

MSI Aegis RS (MS-7C75) with DLSS

Note:

Longer bars indicate better performance (FPS)

3DMark Port Royal (RTX)

Origin PC Big O (PS4 Edition)

MSI Aegis RS (MS-7C75)

Note:

Longer bars indicate better performance

Configurations

Corsair One Pro	Microsoft Windows 10 Pro (1909); 3.3GHz Intel Core i9-10940X; 64GB DDR4 SDRAM 2,667MHz; 11GB Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti; 2TB SSD
Maingear Turbo	Microsoft Windows 10 Home (2004); 3.8GHz Ryzen 9 3900XT; 32GB DDR4 SDRAM 3,600; 11GB Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti; 1TB SSD + 4TB HDD
MSI Aegis RS	Microsoft Windows 10 Home (1909); 3.8GHz Intel Core i7-10700K; 16GB DDR4 SDRAM 3,000; 8GB Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070 Founders Edition; 1TB SSD
MSI Trident X	Microsoft Windows 10 Home (1909); (oc) 3.8GHz Intel Core i7-10700K; 32GB DDR4 SDRAM 2,932; 8GB Nvidia GeForce RTX 2070 Super; 1TB SSD
Origin PC Big O (PS4 Edition)	Microsoft Windows 10 Home (1909); 3.8GHz AMD Ryzen 9 3900X; 16GB DDR4 SDRAM; 8GB Nvidia GeForce RTX 2070 Super; 1.5TB SSD (2TB SSD for console)
Origin PC Chronos	Microsoft Windows 10 Home (2004); Intel Core i9-10900K; 16GB DDR4 SDRAM 3,200; 10GB Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080 (EVGA); 1TB SSD + 500GB SSD

---

Source

Tags:

• Asus Tuf Gaming Nvidia Geforce Rtx 3070 Ti
• Is Nvidia Geforce Rtx 3070 Good For Gaming
• Gigabyte Nvidia Geforce Rtx 3070 Gaming Oc
• Nvidia Geforce Rtx 3070 Ti 8gb
• Nvidia Geforce Rtx 3070 8gb
• Nvidia Geforce Rtx 3070 Laptop Gpu
• Nvidia Geforce Rtx 3070 Ti Driver
• Nvidia Geforce Rtx 4090
• Nvidia Geforce Experience
• Nvidia Geforce
• Nvidia Geforce Drivers
• Nvidia Geforce Gtx 1060

Best macbook pro to buy 2022 what software comes with macbook pro 2022 best laptop similar to macbook pro best macbook pro m1 alternatives apple macbook pro similar products best macbook pro deals best macbook pro docking station best macbook best macbook for students best macbook 2022

Best MacBook Pro Alternatives for 2022

Best MacBook Pro Alternatives for 2022

Fortunately for Apple users, Apple has made some much needed changes to MacBook Pro in the latest generations. That means no more awful keyboard, annoying Touch Bar or overreliance on Thunderbolt/USB-C connections. The latest models of the 14-inch MacBook Pro and the 16-inch MacBook Pro come with M1 series processors, a top-notch design and displays with mini-LED backlighting. Apple also added back some of the ports that were missing in previous generations and removed the Touch Bar. 

But the fact remains that there's a far bigger variety of designs, feature sets and display choices for Windows laptops and Chromebooks, and Windows remains the preferred platform for playing games locally. Cloud gaming lets Macs circumvent the gaming problem to a certain extent, but not completely; only a fraction of the universe of games is playable via the cloud.

An entry-level MacBook can stretch the limits of your budget, and those who've set aside a nice chunk of cash might want something a little more customizable. No one can deny that one appealing thing about Windows laptops is the variety. Even when trying to imitate the offerings of a MacBook (or an iPad or iPad Pro) there are all sizes of far less expensive Chromebooks, as well as 14- and 15-inch laptops that are slightly smaller and lighter than the 16-inch MacBook Pro, but not quite as small as the 13-inch MacBook Air, across the price spectrum. You can also get more variety, with alternatives like 2-in-1s. Plus, we're seeing lots of experimentation with multiscreen designs.

This list is periodically updated with new models we've tested and reviewed. It's a great place to start to get an idea of what's available. If you need advice on whether a particular type of laptop or two-in-one is right for you, jump to our laptop FAQ at the bottom of the list.

So when you want to go Windows, here are our recommendations for laptops to fill that MacBook-size void in your life.

Lori Grunin/CNET

If, like me, you're not a fan of OLED screens for photo editing -- they're not optimized for Adobe RGB and aren't great at tonal range in the shadows -- then what you need is a laptop with a good IPS display. The Dell XPS 17 9720 with the 4K screen option delivers that, and it's not as reflective as the OLED screens I've seen. Dell's PremierColor software isn't perfect, but it gives you more control over screen settings than most I've seen, and it has two Thunderbolt 3 controllers to make your external drives happy. It's heavier than the MacBook, but not much bigger, especially given its larger 17-inch screen. And while its battery life isn't terrific, its performance can certainly keep up. 

And a great lower-cost alternative is the Dell Inspiron 16 Plus, which doesn't head to the front of the line primarily because of its lower build quality, and I'm assuming that if you're looking for a MacBook Pro equivalent you want the metal chassis, better screen and higher-end components. But if you also want to save as much as $1,000, it's worth considering.

Read Dell XPS 17 9720 review

---

Lori Grunin/CNET

If you're drawn to a MacBook Pro for its featureless-slab aesthetic, Razer's your Windows go-to. If you want one that roughly matches the 14-inch Pro for design, size and weight, the Blade 14 is your option; its little brother, the Razer Book 13 makes a great alternative to the 13-inch MacBook Pro when you want something a bit smaller and less expensive. 

A smaller version than the 15-inch staple, the 14-inch Razer Blade delivers a lot of gaming power for its size without feeling small -- an important consideration for a gaming laptop, and one that Apple doesn't need to worry about -- but has decent battery life, a nice size for travel and a subtle design (for a gaming laptop) that's buttoned-up enough for sitting in a meeting with the top brass or clients.

Read our Razer Blade 14 (2021) review.

Josh Goldman/CNET

Dell's XPS 13 is a 13.3-inch laptop that's so trimmed up that the body is basically the size of an older 11.6-inch laptop. Being part of the company's XPS line means both its chassis and components are top-notch for its class, so you're getting great battery life and performance, too. Power delivery is via USB-C and it comes with a microSD reader and headphone jack. It comes in both a standard clamshell as well as the two-in-one, but I prefer the two-in-one because you can fold it up into a tablet if you have to work in a cramped space.

Read our Dell XPS 2-in-1 review.

Josh Goldman/CNET

What's better than the Touch Bar? An entire half-screen second display, that's what. The Duo's tilt-up second screen can act as an ancillary display, an extension of the primary display (for viewing those long web pages) or a separate control center from which you can run Asus' custom utilities or as control surfaces for select creative applications. Plus, Asus excels at squeezing every bit of performance out of its high-end laptops, and the 14-inch delivers great battery life, as well. 

It comes in two models, 15-inch and the 2021 14-inch Duo 14 that we reviewed. The Duo 14 has either 11th-gen Core i5 or i7 processors, optional Nvidia MX450 discrete graphics and up to 32GB of memory.

Read our Asus ZenBook Duo review.

Commonly asked questions

Which is faster, a MacBook or a Windows laptop?

That's an almost impossible question to answer. 

For one thing, it's a moving target. We're starting to see Windows models featuring Intel's new 12th-gen CPUs, which has the same hybrid core architecture as Apple's M1 chips, as well as new mobile GPUs. We haven't yet had a chance to test out many of these next-gen models, but it's safe to assume that Apple's M1 processors will be facing some stiff competition. 

And thus far, Apple hasn't even launched an M1 MacBook with a discrete GPU, though its integrated graphics seem to scale up to compete with current low-end Nvidia and AMD graphics up to about the RTX 3070 and Radeon RX 6800M, and definitely improves on previous Intel-based Macs though neither is really surprising. But it means that at the high end we're still in sort of a MacBook holding pattern when it comes to comparisons with heavier Windows options.

Plus, differences in operating systems complicate things. Mac OS has long been more efficient than Windows and that's only improved now that Apple owns its entire food chain. But it doesn't need to worry about compatibility with partner systems and myriad different components. Then toss in difficulties getting repeatable, comparable, representative and broad-based benchmark results for cross-platform comparisons... well, I don't feel like going down that rabbit hole right now.

Is a MacBook Pro better for content creation than a Windows laptop?

Once again, a difficult question to answer because there's no sweeping generalizations you can make. If you're basing the concern on Windows' old reputation for being inferior for graphics work, it was accurate at the time but is no longer true. 

Screens on Windows laptops have come a long way, and convertibles (aka two-in-ones) mean you can paint or sketch directly on the laptop screen. With a MacBook you'd need to buy an iPad as well.

Some graphics applications are only available on one platform or the other, so figuring out which ones you need and which you can switch away from is the first thing to decide before you choose between Windows and MacOS. Also consider that MacOS no longer supports 32-bit applications, so if you've got an old favorite that hasn't been updated -- this happens most with small utilities -- but still exists on Windows, that's something to think about.

Some applications may also be better optimized for one platform than the other, or rely on a specific GPU from AMD or Nvidia for their best acceleration. Since you can't really use an Nvidia card with a Mac and none of the M1 MacBooks incorporate any discrete graphics, Windows is probably a better bet, especially for programs that rely on Nvidia's CUDA programming interface. Think about any accessories you need, as well -- the drivers and utilities you need to use them may not be available or be stripped down on one or the other.

MacBooks may run faster than equivalently configured Windows laptops simply because MacOS is a lot more tightly integrated with the hardware than Windows can ever be on its side of the fence. Microsoft simply has to support a much wider variety of hardware than Apple will ever need to, and that adds performance overhead; this can be especially important for activities sensitive to latency, like audio recording. Windows' flexibility is both its strength and its weakness. 

How we test computers

The review process for laptops, desktops, tablets and other computer-like devices consists of two parts: performance testing under controlled conditions in the CNET Labs and extensive hands-on use by our expert reviewers. This includes evaluating a device's aesthetics, ergonomics and features. A final review verdict is a combination of both those objective and subjective judgments. 

The list of benchmarking software we use changes over time as the devices we test evolve. The most important core tests we're currently running on every compatible computer include: Primate Labs Geekbench 5, Cinebench R23, PCMark 10 and 3DMark Fire Strike Ultra. 

A more detailed description of each benchmark and how we use it can be found in our How We Test Computers page. 

More computing recommendations

---

Source

https://nichols.my.id/how-to-repair-fatty-liver.html

.