Overall performance at 1440p improves by 52% compared to 4K gaming, and quite a few games are exceeding 144 fps — great if you have one of the best gaming monitors. But while those gains are nice to see, Sapphire's relative performance lead over the reference XTX shrinks to just 1%. You definitely won't notice the performance difference while gaming.
The lead over the RTX 4080 in rasterization games also shrinks to just 4% overall, with Horizon Zero Dawn and Total War: Warhammer 3 still favoring Nvidia's GPU. In contrast, Borderlands 3, Far Cry 6, and Watch Dogs Legion continue to favor AMD by larger margins. CPU limitations are starting to come into play as well, so things like Nvidia's DLSS 3 are potentially more useful (though not the same as true rendered frames).
Ray tracing at 1440p doesn't show any real benefit to the Sapphire card over the reference 7900 XTX. Overall performance is down by 0.7% — tied, in other words — with Metro Exodus Enhanced registering a 6% drop while Bright Memory Infinite showed a 3% improvement.
The new RTX 4070 Ti beats AMD's best at ray tracing as well, by 6% this time, which indicates most of the games are GPU purely GPU limited. That may not be entirely true in all cases, as the CPU has to do a fair amount of work building the BVH (Bounding Volume Hierarchy) structure that gets passed to the GPU, but the RT calculations are so complex that any additional load on the CPU mostly doesn't show up in the final performance.
Two of the games (Bright Memory Infinite and Cyberpunk 2077) show a slightly larger gap between the 4070 Ti and the Sapphire card, while the gap narrows in two of the other games (Metro and Minecraft), with the remaining two being effectively tied relative to 4K performance.
It tells me that AMD can offer an RTX 4090 beating card with a lower price tag, but for some reason they're not interested in the beyond $1000 market.
Vis a vis, this card is the same price as PowerColor and Asus models.
Such a great performer, but I don't like this design xP
For the time being, I am fine with the RX 6700 XT (OC) though. At 1440p and ultra settings, I do get at least around 70 FPS in a number of games I tried so far.
A better GPU would increase the FPS, but it won't improve the built-in graphical assets of many a game, which are ever so often designed to run on consoles, where even the PS5 comes "only" with a peak performance of 10.3 TFlops. And a PC port usually doesn't redesign all of it, which means that a RX 6700 XT with 12.4 TFlops is not easily falling behind in that regard, especially when alongside a resonable CPU and a Gen4 SSD (which the PS5 and Xbox already have, for the increased transfer rate as well for the lower latency).
Its possible but requires too many compromises and should only be used in specific cases.
We need 1-2 more generations before ray tracing will be mainstream.
So right now I could care less about ray tracing, especially at anything above 1080p.
You wonder why we can take you guys seriously?
A little issue I have is that I don't know why game engine companies don't have an option to turn on Ray Tracing on cut scenes only and then none during gameplay, I'd be down for that, not that there's much difference on how games look most games anyways.
I liked the last year's model better (the Nitro Pure one), albeit I'm extremely impartial to white parts and random geometric shapes. The RGB look tasteful to me, albeit I personally wouldn't set it to rainbow colours and would settle to strictly static colour, kind of elegant.
Hey, that's just my opinion. From my short experience hanging around the forums I know any mention of RGB would invite open combat on the comments so... just to be on the safe side, the "you do you" disclaimer.
If I were in the market for a new GPU, I might consider picking this one up. But nah, I'm waiting for Yeston's turn.
Full transparency, the product packaging was part of the reason why I chose my current GPU. Yeah I know, doesn't make sense and all, but hey glad you mentioned the box... Cheers