Originally Posted by Onkyoman
From I've seen and read, the Navi cards are another letdown from AMD. They are at best as fast as the new Nvidia RTX Super cards released to challenge them, but they don't have any hardware-accelerated ray tracing capabilities and still manage to run hot like previous AMD cards. Maybe AMD is resting its laurels and sales expectations on the fact it got its Navi GPUs into both next generation video game consoles from Xbox and Playstation. But its GPU technology is still dated compared to Nvidia.
There is currently only one version of the Navi cards and it wouldn't make for a good HTPC card because it runs hot and has a terrible fan. I don't know what the price difference is with Nvidia, but it is probably not enough to justify buying a Navi card.
My question was more trying to understand if the new Navi cards can perform as good as their Nvidia counterparts in madVR, something that the Polaris cards couldn't.
For example, from a generic computational perspective, the AMD Polaris 580 was a better card than the Nvidia 1060, cheaper, but for madVR use, the Nvidia surpasses it.
Basically, for those using the graphic cards for madVR only, this means that we could not rely in the usual reviews/comparisons, as it does not matter if the AMD card performed better in general, but worst on madVR.
Regarding being a let down, i think its too early to say, but it doesn't seem the consensus on some "technical" forums
. Excluding RT, the 5700XT is faster than the 2060S at the same price, and almost as fast as the 2070S while being 100$ less.
The questions, once again are:
- Does Navi architecture perform the same as Nvidia with madVR?
- Will madVR use Nvidia Tensor cores in the future, providing an definitive advantage for Nvidia (madshi hinted to something like this a while ago ...)
All in all, i'm hopping that the Navi cards to be as good as possible, even if only for the increased competition ... The Super editions would never be launched if Navi weren't at least competitive ...