WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:06.000 AMD's RX 6950xt is almost a totally 00:00:03.720 --> 00:00:10.620 different class of GPU compared to when it first launched to tepid reviews 00:00:07.919 --> 00:00:14.519 earlier this year and with recent price adjustments it is such a good deal now 00:00:12.660 --> 00:00:19.199 that its green opponent no longer makes any sense and neither does its 00:00:16.740 --> 00:00:25.740 predecessor the 6900 XT but why am I talking about the 6000 00:00:21.119 --> 00:00:28.740 series because however the RX 7900 00:00:25.740 --> 00:00:31.439 series performs today and it's good I 00:00:28.740 --> 00:00:35.700 want you to also keep in mind AMD's track record for dramatically improving 00:00:33.660 --> 00:00:40.680 the performance of their gpus through new features and Driver optimizations 00:00:37.880 --> 00:00:45.120 personally I'm counting on it because now that I have publicly committed to 00:00:42.660 --> 00:00:49.260 skipping NVIDIA's latest 40 series cards AMD is my only hope for an upgrade this 00:00:47.640 --> 00:00:53.340 generation just like my only hope of paying our 00:00:51.000 --> 00:00:57.660 production team is our sponsor PDQ automate patch management and software 00:00:55.440 --> 00:01:02.399 updates with PDQ search your library of over 200 ready to deploy applications 00:00:59.640 --> 00:01:07.700 and install software zero touch from your disk start your free trial at 00:01:04.140 --> 00:01:07.700 pdq.com LTT 00:01:14.600 --> 00:01:20.580 right out of the gate the 7900 series is 00:01:17.820 --> 00:01:26.220 full of upgrades it features AMD's brand new rdna 3 architecture up to 24 00:01:23.340 --> 00:01:31.259 gigabytes of much higher bandwidth gddr6 memory substantially boosted core clocks 00:01:28.680 --> 00:01:37.259 across the board and this is great the step down 7900 XT comes with as many 00:01:34.740 --> 00:01:43.740 compute units as AMD's previous Flagship with the beefier XTX rocking even more 00:01:40.979 --> 00:01:46.979 despite having more and faster cores though one of AMD's boldest claims is 00:01:45.840 --> 00:01:52.979 that they've managed to improve efficiency by 54 this is thanks in large 00:01:51.000 --> 00:01:57.659 part to AMD's high bandwidth chiplet design the first of its kind in a modern 00:01:54.899 --> 00:02:00.960 GPU what's more they've beefed up their Ray accelerator cores for real-time 00:01:59.340 --> 00:02:06.060 raytraced Lighting in supported games and finally included AI accelerator 00:02:03.899 --> 00:02:10.739 cores to bring Radeon to feature parody with NVIDIA and Intel's offerings 00:02:08.759 --> 00:02:14.040 unlike those offerings however the Radeon RX 7900 series cards we're 00:02:12.780 --> 00:02:18.500 looking at today come equipped with DisplayPort 2.1 which enables support 00:02:16.560 --> 00:02:25.200 for up to 8K 165 Hertz displays is that even 00:02:21.720 --> 00:02:27.959 necessary who cares it's awesome 00:02:25.200 --> 00:02:33.720 and it's something that NVIDIA's top-end GPU the RTX 4090 cannot do in spite of 00:02:31.800 --> 00:02:37.860 its staggering sixteen hundred dollar sticker price 00:02:34.920 --> 00:02:42.780 all of this is while actually fitting in your case and costing 900 and a thousand 00:02:40.860 --> 00:02:49.980 dollars for the XT and the XTX respectively that is 200 to 300 less 00:02:46.860 --> 00:02:51.599 than the RTX 4080 that AMD says they 00:02:49.980 --> 00:02:56.840 should be able to compete with for Speed Of course we won't be taking their word 00:02:54.239 --> 00:03:02.040 for that AMD has been known to be optimistic at 4K it's clear out of the 00:03:00.480 --> 00:03:07.920 gate and Shadow of the Tomb Raider that whatever team red fans might have hoped 00:03:03.959 --> 00:03:10.800 for the RX 7900 XTX is not AMD's answer 00:03:07.920 --> 00:03:16.440 to the RTX 4090 it's got performance that is realistically more in line with 00:03:12.959 --> 00:03:19.200 the 4080 though that is what AMD said 00:03:16.440 --> 00:03:26.700 and this pattern continues in Hitman cyberpunk 2077 and Modern Warfare 2. 00:03:23.040 --> 00:03:28.019 well great right I mean why did I spend 00:03:26.700 --> 00:03:34.800 all that time talking about the importance of AMD's ongoing driver developments keep that in mind well 00:03:32.280 --> 00:03:39.780 there's this for one thing Forza Horizon 5 is a clear loss for team red thanks to 00:03:37.920 --> 00:03:46.319 those subpar one percent and five percent low frame rates but also this 00:03:43.140 --> 00:03:48.780 for another reason that right there is a 00:03:46.319 --> 00:03:54.180 one thousand dollar GPU beating a sixteen hundred dollar GPU in F1 2022 00:03:52.200 --> 00:03:58.560 and if the results I'm looking at right now are any indication of the kind of 00:03:56.340 --> 00:04:04.860 raw power that AMD's driver team has on tap here there is some serious aging 00:04:01.799 --> 00:04:07.500 like fine wine potential on the table 00:04:04.860 --> 00:04:14.879 of course you should never buy a promise though and today AMD's best Trails 00:04:10.799 --> 00:04:17.760 NVIDIA's best by about 17 which sounds 00:04:14.879 --> 00:04:24.000 bad Until you realize that NVIDIA's card costs 60 percent more compared to the 00:04:21.060 --> 00:04:31.500 4080 the XTX is a no-brainer at nine percent faster and 20 cheaper and the 00:04:27.419 --> 00:04:34.020 7900 XT does even better I mean sure the 00:04:31.500 --> 00:04:38.340 4080 is seven percent faster but costs 33 percent more 00:04:36.080 --> 00:04:42.840 1440p doesn't always show us a difference compared to 4K but here we do 00:04:40.740 --> 00:04:48.840 see some strange behavior in Forza that we retested several times the 7000 00:04:45.900 --> 00:04:54.120 series is actually slower than AMD's older 6000 series cards we think this 00:04:52.199 --> 00:04:57.660 could be a problem with the game as it's the only one out of our suite that does 00:04:55.919 --> 00:05:03.120 it and when we went to test for it says Ray tracing performance we saw that it 00:04:59.460 --> 00:05:06.240 was in fact pretty broken we also see 00:05:03.120 --> 00:05:08.160 the RTX 4080 pull ahead of even the XTX 00:05:06.240 --> 00:05:11.820 in Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Red Dead Redemption which is especially 00:05:10.139 --> 00:05:16.440 surprising considering that virtually every other game shows AMD closing the 00:05:14.100 --> 00:05:20.220 Gap instead the biggest example is in Modern Warfare 2 where the minimum frame 00:05:18.419 --> 00:05:25.620 rates aren't quite up to the level of the RTX 4090 but the average frame rates 00:05:22.860 --> 00:05:30.600 are which again can set some potential for optimization in total these numbers 00:05:28.259 --> 00:05:34.500 put the 7900 Series in a very good position to compete with NVIDIA's 40 00:05:32.220 --> 00:05:39.199 series to the point where if traditional rasterized gaming was all that existed 00:05:36.600 --> 00:05:45.600 NVIDIA would need to lower their prices but it isn't all that exists and Ray 00:05:42.120 --> 00:05:48.060 tracing is sadly still not AMD's strong 00:05:45.600 --> 00:05:54.180 suit while substantially better in cyberpunk than the rx6000 series these 00:05:51.060 --> 00:05:58.080 7000 series gpus are behind NVIDIA by at 00:05:54.180 --> 00:06:00.180 least a factor of two at 4K at 1440p AMD 00:05:58.080 --> 00:06:04.680 at least manages to break the 30 FPS minimum Mark making the game playable 00:06:02.039 --> 00:06:08.820 and you can use FSR to render at a lower resolution and upscale for smooth 00:06:06.479 --> 00:06:13.680 gameplay but at that point we could also do the same thing for Team Green and the 00:06:11.340 --> 00:06:18.600 overall story would still be the same F1 2022 fares slightly better for AMD at 00:06:16.500 --> 00:06:23.400 least with the 7900 XTX pulling up to within 16 percent of the RTX 4080 in 00:06:21.419 --> 00:06:27.780 minimum frame rates and actually near parity on average which again gives me 00:06:26.160 --> 00:06:31.979 hope that some of AMD's woes with Ray tracing are a matter of optimization and 00:06:30.060 --> 00:06:36.660 that feeling only grows with shadow of the Tomb Raider where even at 4K it's 00:06:34.020 --> 00:06:43.560 within about 12 percent of the 4090 and turning out nearly 60 FPS it is an older 00:06:39.960 --> 00:06:46.139 game but that's not bad it's just that a 00:06:43.560 --> 00:06:52.860 good race ran when the other guy ran faster is still an l and ultimately the 00:06:50.039 --> 00:06:58.199 RX 7900 XTX just couldn't even come close to the RTX 4080s level of 00:06:55.440 --> 00:07:02.819 performance with Ray tracing enabled I suspect that most people myself included 00:07:00.539 --> 00:07:07.319 still don't use Ray tracing often and won't really be affected but given that 00:07:05.220 --> 00:07:12.360 these things do still cost a thousand flipping dollars it's definitely a skid 00:07:09.900 --> 00:07:16.680 mark on what has otherwise been a pretty good showing so far and I'm afraid 00:07:14.520 --> 00:07:20.580 there's more where that came from the professionals who have need of this kind 00:07:18.360 --> 00:07:24.660 of graphical horsepower will be well disappointed isn't quite the right word 00:07:22.500 --> 00:07:28.979 but looking at these numbers they're not going to be excited either yes blender 00:07:27.479 --> 00:07:34.800 runs a good eight to twenty percent faster on the 7000 versus the 6000 00:07:31.680 --> 00:07:37.440 series but NVIDIA walks all over AMD's 00:07:34.800 --> 00:07:42.180 entire stack at between three to four times the performance thankfully AMD's 00:07:40.740 --> 00:07:48.180 new encoding engine helps them push ahead of the RTX 4080 in DaVinci Resolve 00:07:44.759 --> 00:07:49.620 in both h.264 and especially h.265 which 00:07:48.180 --> 00:07:55.979 their encoding engine seems to favor that's a good 20 more speed for the XTX 00:07:52.560 --> 00:07:58.860 there not bad though the 49d does remain 00:07:55.979 --> 00:08:02.639 on top procyon video and photo are also pretty good for AMD with performance 00:08:00.240 --> 00:08:05.880 that I would call comparable it's within a few percentage points either way you 00:08:04.259 --> 00:08:10.979 look at it and rounding out the video editing Suite is topaz AI which despite 00:08:08.699 --> 00:08:19.500 the name is using GPU compute here rather than any AI course and wow even 00:08:15.599 --> 00:08:21.660 the 7900 XT outperforms the RTX 4090 00:08:19.500 --> 00:08:27.180 here this workload seems to heavily favor AMD's Infinity cash as the 6000 00:08:24.300 --> 00:08:32.399 series cards aren't too shabby either specvperf brings AMD about as many wins 00:08:29.639 --> 00:08:37.740 as losses but the degree to which the 7000 series wins over the competition is 00:08:35.099 --> 00:08:43.620 often much lower than the losses that they suffer with especially poor results 00:08:39.839 --> 00:08:45.420 in 3ds Max Maya and SolidWorks which 00:08:43.620 --> 00:08:50.880 even dip under the performance of the 6000 series that's pretty rough those 00:08:48.180 --> 00:08:56.700 are kind of important applications they pull off major wins in Catia Creo energy 00:08:53.519 --> 00:08:58.620 medical and especially Siemens NX though 00:08:56.700 --> 00:09:02.459 as we've said in the past this is because the version in specview perf 00:09:00.480 --> 00:09:06.660 doesn't support Hardware acceleration on NVIDIA and actually this is just going 00:09:04.800 --> 00:09:10.620 to be excluded from our averages when we calculate it later on spec workstation 00:09:09.000 --> 00:09:14.399 Paints the radons in a significantly better light though with product 00:09:12.060 --> 00:09:19.260 development life sciences and energy all pushing well past Team Green but media 00:09:16.980 --> 00:09:24.839 and entertainment as well as GPU compute still stay with NVIDIA likely thanks to 00:09:21.899 --> 00:09:28.980 opencl's relative obscurity next to Cuda despite the blows the 7900 series car 00:09:27.120 --> 00:09:32.459 cards took though their beefed up media engines and GPU compute horsepower 00:09:30.779 --> 00:09:36.240 placed them with an average of two to ten percent of Team Green given the wide 00:09:34.740 --> 00:09:39.300 performance spread we saw depending on the workload potential prospective 00:09:37.980 --> 00:09:43.860 professional people will want to think long and hard about which capabilities 00:09:41.519 --> 00:09:47.940 are most important to them before making a final decision changing gears a little 00:09:46.500 --> 00:09:53.339 we found something interesting when we were testing resizable bar on both Intel 00:09:50.399 --> 00:09:56.880 and AMD platforms it seems like the performance improvements regardless of 00:09:55.140 --> 00:10:01.740 whether you have a team blue or team red CPU can be expected to be pretty similar 00:09:59.519 --> 00:10:07.260 despite AMD heavily marketing smart access memory as a selling point for the 00:10:04.140 --> 00:10:09.000 ryzen plus Radeon ecosystem bear in mind 00:10:07.260 --> 00:10:14.040 that this is a sample size of just two games but without resizable bar we're 00:10:12.360 --> 00:10:19.019 figuring you can expect anywhere from a 10 to 35 percent reduction in 00:10:16.019 --> 00:10:21.540 performance regardless of which side you 00:10:19.019 --> 00:10:25.920 swing for as for AMD's updated video encoder there's a lot to be excited 00:10:23.339 --> 00:10:29.820 about here av1 support and baked in machine learning to improve quality at 00:10:27.600 --> 00:10:33.480 the top of my list but despite receiving our cards early we actually only had a 00:10:31.860 --> 00:10:37.260 few days to test these things prior to embargo because we didn't have a driver 00:10:35.220 --> 00:10:40.200 so we were forced to push our image quality comparisons to a separate video 00:10:38.880 --> 00:10:46.200 that you can expect to see in the next couple of weeks one of AMD's other selling points is its 00:10:44.459 --> 00:10:49.860 smaller footprint compared to NVIDIA's 40 series gpus and I was concerned that 00:10:48.779 --> 00:10:55.079 this would come at the expense of thermals so I was extremely pleased to 00:10:52.500 --> 00:11:00.420 see that AMD's new cooler design has the 7000 series actually performing better 00:10:57.660 --> 00:11:04.320 than the 6000 series with that said though AMD does not have the luxury of 00:11:02.459 --> 00:11:09.300 only competing with themselves and NVIDIA is clearly in the better position 00:11:06.300 --> 00:11:10.740 here though with that said both of the 00:11:09.300 --> 00:11:16.200 NVIDIA cards we tested have substantially larger heatsinks with fan 00:11:13.440 --> 00:11:20.459 off modes while AMD's new cards always ran their fans it's probable that 00:11:18.720 --> 00:11:25.200 designs from the likes of ASUS or power color will run much cooler and hopefully 00:11:23.579 --> 00:11:29.160 quieter now we need to talk about core clocks 00:11:27.660 --> 00:11:33.540 because they're a little different this generation thanks to the decoupling of 00:11:31.200 --> 00:11:37.560 the front end and the Shader clocks the idea here is that the front end will 00:11:35.339 --> 00:11:41.459 benefit more from higher clocks while the more numerous Shader units crunch 00:11:39.420 --> 00:11:44.940 data in parallel at a lower clock speed resulting in a better balance of 00:11:42.899 --> 00:11:51.000 performance and efficiency and you can see that in action here where both the 00:11:47.100 --> 00:11:53.700 7900 XTX and XT have a consistent 200 00:11:51.000 --> 00:11:57.839 megahertz gap between the two clocks and even in a power virus like MSI combustor 00:11:55.980 --> 00:12:02.339 these clocks remained higher than the previous generation clock stability in 00:12:00.120 --> 00:12:06.839 game is similar to the 6000 series cards but NVIDIA's 40 series manages flatter 00:12:05.040 --> 00:12:10.800 lines throughout the Run suggesting that AMD is trying to be pretty aggressive 00:12:08.880 --> 00:12:15.120 with managing power consumption which makes sense because AMD talked a 00:12:13.560 --> 00:12:18.540 lot about performance per watt in their marketing and looking at these in-game 00:12:16.800 --> 00:12:23.100 paragraphs no that seems to suggest that their 00:12:20.820 --> 00:12:29.040 self-congratulations are well Justified the Radeon RX 7900 XTX Drew comparable 00:12:26.579 --> 00:12:33.720 power to the 4080 and this held even when we hit it with MSI combustor the XT 00:12:31.320 --> 00:12:37.680 was even better still staying in line with its predecessor but what's 00:12:35.640 --> 00:12:42.660 interesting is when we take a magnifying glass to how many watts the 7000 series 00:12:39.660 --> 00:12:45.180 poles per frame in this example while 00:12:42.660 --> 00:12:50.519 the raw wattage drops much closer to the RTX 4080 when we capped the frame rate 00:12:47.880 --> 00:12:55.320 to 100 the total watts per frame increases substantially this suggests 00:12:53.220 --> 00:12:59.639 that while the RTX 4080 is able to throttle itself effectively AMD is 00:12:58.079 --> 00:13:04.139 actually having some trouble with power management and AMD's idle power 00:13:02.160 --> 00:13:11.820 consumption numbers seem to corroborate this where the RTX 4080 idles at around 00:13:07.260 --> 00:13:14.940 15 to 20 watts the 7900 XTX regularly 00:13:11.820 --> 00:13:18.120 sucks Back 40 and sometimes over 50 00:13:14.940 --> 00:13:20.100 Watts while doing nothing at all what's 00:13:18.120 --> 00:13:24.480 even more baffling is that we noticed what seems like a major bug during our 00:13:22.139 --> 00:13:29.339 testing depending on the monitor that we plugged into the GPU we saw a wildly 00:13:27.120 --> 00:13:34.639 different total system power at the wall from a respectable 52 Watts with nothing 00:13:32.100 --> 00:13:41.040 plugged in to a whopping 171 Watts with our 27 inch Rog Swift 00:13:37.860 --> 00:13:44.040 bench display using some other monitors 00:13:41.040 --> 00:13:46.740 even caused performance to drop now 00:13:44.040 --> 00:13:51.180 given that I have a high-end display and I live in Vancouver Canada where energy 00:13:48.480 --> 00:13:54.540 is the one thing that is still cheap none of this is a deal breaker for me 00:13:52.860 --> 00:14:00.660 but if I was in Europe where Energy prices had surged pun intended it would 00:13:58.019 --> 00:14:05.639 give me pause before I was willing to look at team red adding insult to injury 00:14:03.300 --> 00:14:09.839 this high idle power draw means that the fans are spinning at all times kicking 00:14:07.980 --> 00:14:14.100 that heat out into your room even if you're just scrolling Reddit meaning 00:14:11.820 --> 00:14:17.820 that the 7900 series is going to be a little less comfortable to live with 00:14:15.959 --> 00:14:22.740 maybe if you go team red you could pick up a blank T rather than a retro polar 00:14:20.100 --> 00:14:26.459 fleece from ltdstore.com space heater one possible explanation for this high 00:14:24.779 --> 00:14:32.639 idle power consumption could be that this is a similar situation to the ryzen 00:14:28.500 --> 00:14:34.620 7 5800 X 3D that CPU's use of 3D V cash 00:14:32.639 --> 00:14:39.240 limited its stability if voltages weren't dialed in just right and we 00:14:37.620 --> 00:14:43.139 could be witnessing similar teething issues with this new chiplet 00:14:40.680 --> 00:14:47.279 architecture and supporting that theory is the fact that the driver straight up 00:14:45.060 --> 00:14:51.720 locks out power adjustments below 90 percent of total board power when we 00:14:49.500 --> 00:14:56.579 asked them about this AMD played pretty Coy with us which tells us either we're 00:14:53.820 --> 00:15:00.720 right or that they're not sure either now it's time to talk about what this 00:14:58.560 --> 00:15:05.040 data means for the GPU Market first of all anyone who was hoping that the 7900 00:15:03.000 --> 00:15:11.100 series would come in and compete head to head against the RTX 4090 will be sorely 00:15:08.279 --> 00:15:15.959 disappointed at least for today we saw a brief glimpses of Glory but the RTX 4090 00:15:14.040 --> 00:15:21.720 remains on its Throne making it tough to dislodge its price from that TI Titan 00:15:19.740 --> 00:15:26.639 perch that it currently occupies as a Halo product but while AMD doesn't have 00:15:24.540 --> 00:15:33.540 a direct competitor to it I still think the 7900 XTX is a much better value 00:15:30.300 --> 00:15:36.120 as for the RTX 4080 well the comparison 00:15:33.540 --> 00:15:39.480 gets a little more complicated even the XT model comes really close in 00:15:37.980 --> 00:15:44.880 traditional rendering and the value proposition of either 7900 GPU is a 00:15:43.199 --> 00:15:49.980 damning indictment of NVIDIA's pricing but AMD does remain on the back foot in 00:15:48.300 --> 00:15:54.060 Ray tracing performance and that's something that NVIDIA can point to and 00:15:51.959 --> 00:16:00.000 claim makes up the difference even if nobody seriously cares it'll take people 00:15:56.639 --> 00:16:02.040 like me running out and buying 7900 00:16:00.000 --> 00:16:04.440 series cards instead of 40 series to make NVIDIA realize that they're out to 00:16:03.660 --> 00:16:09.720 lunch but wait why are we saying this now you 00:16:07.500 --> 00:16:14.880 might think we took a lot of flack for covering for NVIDIA's pricing in the RTX 00:16:12.000 --> 00:16:18.839 4080 review didn't we well not so much first off we compared it to cards that 00:16:17.279 --> 00:16:23.820 were available at the time it released and we ended the video with a message to 00:16:20.940 --> 00:16:29.040 wait for our dna3 and we're reviewing the 7900 Series in much the same way 00:16:26.820 --> 00:16:34.800 second it had already been made known that the RX 7900 XTX was not going to 00:16:32.339 --> 00:16:40.620 compete with the 4090 which depending on how you look at it means that either the 00:16:37.139 --> 00:16:43.139 RTX 4080 is actually a 90 class card and 00:16:40.620 --> 00:16:49.620 priced accordingly with the 490 being a TI or something or the 7900 XT and XTX 00:16:47.459 --> 00:16:55.920 are the current gen equivalent of the 6800 and 6800 XT and are themselves 00:16:52.860 --> 00:16:57.300 overpriced basically it's kind of a game 00:16:55.920 --> 00:17:01.980 of pick your Villain at this point because the reality is that 600 top of 00:17:00.060 --> 00:17:06.500 the line gpus are a thing of the past and that was an assumption that our 00:17:04.079 --> 00:17:10.679 review made but did not fully explain it's worth pointing out by the way since 00:17:08.819 --> 00:17:16.679 I'm being a downer right now anyway that while AMD supports DisplayPort 2.1 and 00:17:14.040 --> 00:17:22.439 NVIDIA's 40 series does not AMD went with a half measure by supporting only 00:17:18.600 --> 00:17:24.419 the uhbr 13.5 spec what this means is 00:17:22.439 --> 00:17:28.559 that it can only achieve its lofty resolution and frame rate support 00:17:25.740 --> 00:17:32.880 through display stream compression DSC allows up to three times more bandwidth 00:17:30.360 --> 00:17:37.460 than is both near zero latency and Visually lossless though that doesn't 00:17:34.980 --> 00:17:41.100 mean that there is no quality loss practically speaking this won't be a 00:17:39.419 --> 00:17:44.280 problem even if it were noticeable given that these gpus aren't really capable of 00:17:42.960 --> 00:17:48.360 pushing those resolutions and frame rates anyway but we brought it up with 00:17:46.380 --> 00:17:52.440 the RTX 40 series so we're bringing it up here for the sake of completeness it 00:17:50.340 --> 00:17:56.700 means that those new 8K ultrawide displays being shown up at CES will just 00:17:54.840 --> 00:18:00.900 barely be able to run at 85 Hertz without DSC but I would never expect 00:17:59.100 --> 00:18:05.100 that to be a problem for an actual user one slightly problematic thing that I do 00:18:03.120 --> 00:18:09.240 need to address is that we've taken a very glass half full approach today and 00:18:07.860 --> 00:18:14.280 I can understand why some of you might be frustrated by it we've gone and spun 00:18:12.059 --> 00:18:19.679 AMD's potential future driver improvements as a good thing when 00:18:17.100 --> 00:18:23.580 actually they're kind of bad another perspective is that it means that AMD is 00:18:21.840 --> 00:18:27.840 releasing these products even though they haven't really finished optimizing 00:18:25.500 --> 00:18:31.919 them and if you've kind of felt that way up to this point I totally get where 00:18:29.580 --> 00:18:37.200 you're coming from we ran into some kind of bizarre no really bizarre crashes and 00:18:35.700 --> 00:18:43.260 there are certainly features that could be added or refined but In fairness to 00:18:40.320 --> 00:18:47.760 our charitable approach today AMD is pricing these gpus according to what 00:18:45.120 --> 00:18:51.660 they are now and their track record for fixing these things is actually pretty 00:18:49.679 --> 00:18:57.660 good even if sometimes it takes a while as they focus on new features like FSR 00:18:54.200 --> 00:19:00.419 3.0 and the hyper RX performance 00:18:57.660 --> 00:19:04.799 Optimizer that have yet to Launch and if this is where performance is now with 00:19:02.760 --> 00:19:10.140 some of what broken certainly unoptimized drivers AMD clearly has some 00:19:08.280 --> 00:19:13.980 great Hardware on their hands here they even brought back the USBC Port 00:19:11.940 --> 00:19:19.020 something that is great for hooking up a monitor via a single cable and a godsend 00:19:16.679 --> 00:19:21.600 for enthusiasts like myself I'm still mad that NVIDIA removed it after the 20 00:19:20.700 --> 00:19:27.059 series so the RX 7900 XTX is going into my 00:19:25.140 --> 00:19:33.120 gaming rig and I'm officially switching to team red for the first time since the 00:19:30.419 --> 00:19:37.620 3870. goodness gracious 00:19:35.160 --> 00:19:42.059 the performance is good enough the price is good enough well at least compared to 00:19:39.660 --> 00:19:46.200 the competition and the downsides are small enough that I am comfortable 00:19:43.620 --> 00:19:50.580 making the leap just like I'm gonna comfortably leap to this Segway from our 00:19:48.240 --> 00:19:55.799 sponsor MSI and their recently released mag z790 Tomahawk Wi-Fi motherboard the 00:19:53.460 --> 00:20:00.000 mag 790 Tomahawk is a gaming oriented ATX motherboard that balances value with 00:19:58.080 --> 00:20:04.919 premium Hardware it's built around the latest Intel z790 chipset which supports 00:20:02.580 --> 00:20:09.179 12th and 13th gen Intel core processors with dual 8-pin power connectors and 00:20:06.900 --> 00:20:13.559 core boost technology is able to sustain heavy CPU power loads to better support 00:20:11.400 --> 00:20:17.940 demanding game settings it also features m.2 Shield frozer MSI's Advanced thermal 00:20:16.500 --> 00:20:21.900 solution which offers great protection for maximum SSD transfer speed 00:20:19.860 --> 00:20:25.740 performance with integrated options for multiple cooling methods the z790 00:20:24.000 --> 00:20:28.919 tomahawk ensures Optimal Performance when you need it the most make sure to 00:20:27.720 --> 00:20:31.740 check it out at the link in the video description if you enjoyed this and 00:20:30.780 --> 00:20:36.720 you're looking for something else to watch maybe go check out that Arc 30 day challenge video I mentioned Intel's 00:20:35.520 --> 00:20:40.940 doing some really good things over there but they also have a lot of work to do