WEBVTT

00:00:00.080 --> 00:00:05.680
remember gpus that had great price to Performance and offered true

00:00:04.040 --> 00:00:12.920
generational leaps over their predecessors oh what a time that was but

00:00:09.200 --> 00:00:16.560
this is now and AMD's new Radeon RX 7700

00:00:12.920 --> 00:00:18.840
XT and 7800 XT aren't going to make us

00:00:16.560 --> 00:00:26.119
relive those Glory Days I can tell you that up front but right now maybe they

00:00:23.039 --> 00:00:29.240
don't have to maybe all they need to do

00:00:26.119 --> 00:00:32.520
is just not give us a wedgie and shove

00:00:29.240 --> 00:00:34.120
our heads in the to is and you know what

00:00:32.520 --> 00:00:38.640
I'm feeling pretty optimistic to the point where I'm even going to

00:00:35.600 --> 00:00:40.600
preemptively thank AMD for not treating

00:00:38.640 --> 00:00:45.360
me like a high school bully and I'm going to hope that the final members of

00:00:42.640 --> 00:00:51.360
the rdna 3 desktop family don't let me down with any game-breaking bugs that

00:00:47.239 --> 00:00:54.320
wipe this smile off my face wipe like

00:00:51.360 --> 00:00:58.039
this star wipe to our sponsor enlisted fight in iconic World War II campaigns

00:00:56.640 --> 00:01:02.879
in this immersive free-to-play firstperson shooter with detailed era

00:01:00.519 --> 00:01:07.479
Accurate Firearms show your dad statistically he'll probably think it's

00:01:04.439 --> 00:01:09.159
cool get enlisted at the link below AMD

00:01:07.479 --> 00:01:15.799
is positioning their new hotness against NVIDIA's RTX 460 TI and RTX 470 and at

00:01:14.280 --> 00:01:20.200
least from the preliminary numbers that they showed it looks like NVIDIA's

00:01:17.759 --> 00:01:25.840
preemptive price drop on the 16 gig version of the 460 TI may not be enough

00:01:23.720 --> 00:01:31.520
all other things aside both of these cards have more than 8 GB of vram which

00:01:28.520 --> 00:01:34.720
is a major advantage over the less

00:01:31.520 --> 00:01:37.799
overpriced 8 gig variant of the 4060 TI

00:01:34.720 --> 00:01:40.960
in games that require it and the 7800 XT

00:01:37.799 --> 00:01:43.040
in particular looms very impressive at

00:01:40.960 --> 00:01:48.520
least on paper compared to its little brother it has six more compute units

00:01:45.040 --> 00:01:50.479
and only slightly lower clocks with 45%

00:01:48.520 --> 00:01:57.200
faster memory and a proportionally wider bus to go with it all of that for just

00:01:53.200 --> 00:01:59.680
$50 more and an extra 18 watts of power

00:01:57.200 --> 00:02:05.600
consumption which actually raises a lot of questions for me can the RX 7700 XT

00:02:03.159 --> 00:02:09.640
justify its existence at that price will NVIDIA have to lower their prices even

00:02:07.880 --> 00:02:15.040
more than they already did a few days ago oh and when is FSR 3

00:02:12.760 --> 00:02:18.920
coming we can't answer that last one just yet but we can address the first

00:02:16.959 --> 00:02:22.480
two with some benchmarks given this is our first post Hiatus Hardware review

00:02:20.959 --> 00:02:26.920
and we were working under a deadline we had to make some tough

00:02:24.640 --> 00:02:31.200
choices on which gpus to include in our roster so we ended up with fewer cards

00:02:29.400 --> 00:02:35.160
but more more QC which is going to be the path forward until some of our new

00:02:32.879 --> 00:02:40.519
automations come online one final note by the way our RTX 3070 needed the

00:02:38.080 --> 00:02:43.879
resizable bar BIOS flash so if you're playing along at home with a 30 series

00:02:42.280 --> 00:02:47.159
GPU and you're getting lower numbers than us do make sure you check that

00:02:46.000 --> 00:02:53.120
while you're waiting for your PC to restart maybe check out our new screwdriver variants from LTT Store.com

00:02:51.280 --> 00:02:59.040
we're going to start with 1080P and work our way up the geometric mean of all of

00:02:56.080 --> 00:03:05.080
our testing puts the RX 7800 XT at the top of the charts which is great except

00:03:02.159 --> 00:03:11.200
this is kind of awkward the last gen RX 6800 XT comes in as a surprisingly close

00:03:08.680 --> 00:03:16.120
second with the RTX 470 picking up the bronze though with silver tier 1% lows

00:03:14.400 --> 00:03:22.159
which indicates a similarly smooth gameplay experience interestingly atomic

00:03:19.480 --> 00:03:26.920
heart has the 470 leading the pack by a fair margin probably indicating poor

00:03:24.599 --> 00:03:31.840
optimization for AMD in that particular title given the rest of our results the

00:03:29.239 --> 00:03:36.560
76 700 XT meanwhile works out to be about 15% slower than its bigger brother

00:03:35.200 --> 00:03:41.360
and lives smack dab in the middle between NVIDIA's current and previous 70

00:03:38.959 --> 00:03:45.599
class cards pretty respectable and it puts these new cards in a really nice

00:03:43.280 --> 00:03:51.519
sweet spot for high refresh rate 1080p gaming in modern titles though it is

00:03:48.080 --> 00:03:54.239
worth noting that the 6800 XT is just

00:03:51.519 --> 00:03:58.560
about on the 7800 xt's level and you may be able to find it for cheap in the

00:03:55.720 --> 00:04:03.760
coming weeks also worth noting the RTX 3070 is a Fair bit cheaper than the 7700

00:04:01.439 --> 00:04:08.040
XT right now if you care about NVIDIA's exclusive features though it will be

00:04:05.760 --> 00:04:13.560
slower and offer slightly worse value for its performance at least in terms of

00:04:10.120 --> 00:04:15.159
raw raster FPS needless to say the 40

00:04:13.560 --> 00:04:20.560
series isn't winning any value Awards right now so let's move on many of the

00:04:18.639 --> 00:04:26.040
best gaming monitors these days are 1440p and AMD markets both of these new

00:04:23.680 --> 00:04:31.960
gpus for driving these higher resolution displays and this is where things get

00:04:28.639 --> 00:04:34.840
really spicy and also a little weird

00:04:31.960 --> 00:04:42.320
while both cards still enjoy a nice lead over their green Rivals the RX 6800 XT

00:04:38.840 --> 00:04:46.039
is once again pretty dang close to the

00:04:42.320 --> 00:04:49.880
7800 XT and that's despite being a last

00:04:46.039 --> 00:04:52.960
gen card and pushing 77% more pixels

00:04:49.880 --> 00:04:55.320
than 1080p more on that later the 7800

00:04:52.960 --> 00:04:59.680
XT does still maintain its performance Gap with its current gen sibling however

00:04:57.720 --> 00:05:05.639
and it's looking at a geomean of about 8% faster than the RTX 470 across all of

00:05:02.759 --> 00:05:11.800
our testing the 7700 XT for its part still slots in between the RTX 370 and

00:05:09.120 --> 00:05:17.000
470 though it skews a little closer to the 3070 as for the 4060 TI doesn't

00:05:15.240 --> 00:05:21.800
really enter the equation at all making AMD again the current gen winner in

00:05:19.639 --> 00:05:28.080
terms of performance and value for modern titles at

00:05:24.120 --> 00:05:30.479
1440p until we turn on Ray tracing where

00:05:28.080 --> 00:05:39.160
of course the story changes dramatically in NVIDIA's favor here even the last gen

00:05:34.440 --> 00:05:40.800
3070 beats the 7800 XT now I'm not going

00:05:39.160 --> 00:05:45.240
to tell you what to think about the importance of rate tracing that's up to

00:05:43.000 --> 00:05:50.600
you but it could have a significant impact on your evaluation of who is the

00:05:48.160 --> 00:05:54.759
better value here despite the inroads that AMD is making generation over

00:05:52.240 --> 00:05:59.240
generation NVIDIA simply has a more mature implementation of this NextGen

00:05:56.840 --> 00:06:04.120
lighting technology both on the hardware side and in software speaking of

00:06:02.280 --> 00:06:09.039
software while we were gathering this data we noticed something really bizarre

00:06:06.319 --> 00:06:13.840
with The Last of Us Part One first of all here's how the RX 6700 XT looks

00:06:11.720 --> 00:06:18.199
across all the runs we did you can see that it's really consistent the lines

00:06:15.840 --> 00:06:26.720
are mostly overlapping that is a really good thing for smooth gameplay now let's

00:06:21.400 --> 00:06:29.880
look at the 7700 XT and wow that is all

00:06:26.720 --> 00:06:33.120
over the place in fact this is how all

00:06:29.880 --> 00:06:35.759
of our 8 gig cards look except this

00:06:33.120 --> 00:06:42.080
isn't an 8 gig card and this shouldn't be happening given that it is a 12 gig

00:06:38.520 --> 00:06:46.080
card but we reran the test 10 times to

00:06:42.080 --> 00:06:48.120
verify and unfortunately it just didn't

00:06:46.080 --> 00:06:54.400
behave like the other higher memory cards which look a lot more like the

00:06:50.440 --> 00:06:56.879
6700 XT I showed you before so what's

00:06:54.400 --> 00:07:02.479
going on here our best guess here is that either the graphics driver or the

00:06:59.160 --> 00:07:05.400
game are treating the 7700 XT as if it

00:07:02.479 --> 00:07:10.919
only had 8 GB of vram when in fact it has 12 what this implies is that it's

00:07:08.120 --> 00:07:15.840
actually possible for the 7700 XT to gain some performance in The Last of Us

00:07:12.759 --> 00:07:17.360
Part One and there could be even more to

00:07:15.840 --> 00:07:22.479
the story that could push it higher still you might notice that f123 wasn't

00:07:20.639 --> 00:07:28.240
in our test Suite this time around despite AMD including it in theirs this

00:07:25.360 --> 00:07:33.240
is because both of the new cards and it should be noted only the new cards

00:07:30.960 --> 00:07:37.360
consistently crashed the entire system during game playay we originally thought

00:07:35.479 --> 00:07:41.960
it might be the game like maybe a recent update but then even non-game

00:07:39.840 --> 00:07:46.479
applications like Hardware info began causing crashes we are still talking to

00:07:44.680 --> 00:07:51.400
AMD about this and if we have an update from them we're going to have that posted in the video description but

00:07:49.319 --> 00:07:56.159
Labs's preliminary investigation points to it being a driver bug that's caused

00:07:53.639 --> 00:08:01.960
by error handling code being called for erroneously which is ironic and if it

00:07:59.759 --> 00:08:06.840
happens enough we'll lock up the driver entirely and crash the system this could

00:08:04.879 --> 00:08:10.960
be impacting performance results across the board and we would have no way of

00:08:08.960 --> 00:08:14.639
knowing about it but unfortunately this is the sort of thing that happens often

00:08:12.879 --> 00:08:20.159
with product launches and launch Day reviews so just keep it in mind as we

00:08:17.440 --> 00:08:23.560
continue now this isn't a GPU tier that is normally associated with high-end

00:08:21.960 --> 00:08:28.800
productivity so this section is going to be pretty brief but if blender is your

00:08:26.240 --> 00:08:32.479
weapon of choice AMD will get the job done but but Team Green is going to be

00:08:31.240 --> 00:08:36.599
the way to go if you want the best performance because keep in mind we're

00:08:34.279 --> 00:08:40.399
not even showing the ray accelerated Optics renderer here which is even

00:08:38.440 --> 00:08:47.000
faster on NVIDIA we're just looking at compute and even now the lowly RTX 460

00:08:44.200 --> 00:08:55.240
TI is out ahead of the 800 class cards from AMD that wait a second why is the

00:08:50.240 --> 00:08:56.600
6800 XT also ahead of the 7800 XT ah

00:08:55.240 --> 00:09:03.200
okay I said I would address this later and later is now the RX 7800 XT is

00:09:00.240 --> 00:09:12.519
really more like this generation's RX 6800 non XT I mean I can kind of see

00:09:08.120 --> 00:09:14.360
AMD's justification the 7800 XT does

00:09:12.519 --> 00:09:20.160
bring some new stuff to the table the rdna 3 chiplet design AI accelerators

00:09:17.240 --> 00:09:24.880
higher core clocks faster memory and as we've seen the whole package usually

00:09:22.360 --> 00:09:31.600
works out in gaming but for compute performance the 6800 XT still beats it

00:09:29.480 --> 00:09:36.480
so I know this is a bit of an aside but AMD can you please settle on a coherent

00:09:34.000 --> 00:09:42.480
naming scheme already are we committed to XT and XTX are we going to add more

00:09:39.839 --> 00:09:48.079
X's for the 8,000 series is this all part of a back alley deal to make people

00:09:44.440 --> 00:09:50.800
think that XFX cards are faster I mean

00:09:48.079 --> 00:09:57.680
to amds credit at least every 7,000 series radon to date is our dna3 so

00:09:54.600 --> 00:10:00.000
that's something but this inconsistency

00:09:57.680 --> 00:10:05.720
makes intergenerational comparison extremely difficult for consumers even

00:10:02.680 --> 00:10:08.880
just looking at these two cards the 7700

00:10:05.720 --> 00:10:11.680
XT really does look like a substantial

00:10:08.880 --> 00:10:15.440
upgrade from the 6700 XT more compute units extra memory bandwidth and

00:10:13.600 --> 00:10:19.760
significantly better performance like yeah this is faster in games but it's a

00:10:17.320 --> 00:10:24.480
less clear-cut picture sorry coming back to our testing where AMD in general does

00:10:22.640 --> 00:10:29.640
have an advantage over NVIDIA is in Da Vinci resolve where the 6800 XT still

00:10:27.160 --> 00:10:36.760
tops the charts for h264 with with the 7800 XT trailing just behind the RTX 470

00:10:33.440 --> 00:10:39.519
and the 7700 XT rendering twice as fast

00:10:36.760 --> 00:10:44.760
as the 46ti which languishes with the last gen cards we can say basically the

00:10:42.399 --> 00:10:51.560
same thing for h265 performance and in av1 encoding the 7800 XT pulls clearly

00:10:48.079 --> 00:10:54.320
ahead of the RTX 470 don't mind the 460

00:10:51.560 --> 00:10:59.839
TI though it just likes to take its time keeping in mind that there are no

00:10:56.040 --> 00:11:02.279
first-party built by AMD RX 7700 XT

00:10:59.839 --> 00:11:06.920
cards and ours is therefore a third party design from XFX your mileage may

00:11:05.040 --> 00:11:12.399
vary with respect to power consumption but um we did see some weird stuff here

00:11:09.800 --> 00:11:18.600
and we do need to tell you about it and yeah that is not an error our 7700 XT

00:11:16.079 --> 00:11:26.240
reports higher power consumption than the built by AMD 7800 XT with a peak of

00:11:22.399 --> 00:11:28.160
roughly 300 watts of course they are so

00:11:26.240 --> 00:11:32.360
close that they might as well be drawing the same amount of power our best theory

00:11:30.360 --> 00:11:36.959
is that perhaps the lower compute unit count allows for more thermal headro for

00:11:34.399 --> 00:11:41.000
it to boost under this power virus load it also has a significantly beefier

00:11:39.000 --> 00:11:44.639
cooler when we add NVIDIA to the mix though the hairs were splitting between

00:11:42.600 --> 00:11:50.720
these cards start to feel a lot less important not only does the 460 TI

00:11:47.839 --> 00:11:57.240
significantly undercut the 7700 XT for power consumption even the 470 draws

00:11:54.440 --> 00:12:01.399
less power maybe though this is just combuster combusting things

00:11:59.880 --> 00:12:07.279
let's turn our attention then to our go-to Real World game for power testing

00:12:04.880 --> 00:12:11.959
f123 for as long as we were able to run it anyway here we see relative power

00:12:10.320 --> 00:12:16.959
consumption that is actually more in line with what we'd expect they are less

00:12:13.880 --> 00:12:19.199
power hungry than the 6800 XT thankfully

00:12:16.959 --> 00:12:24.320
so that's one unambiguous generational Improvement now it's time to talk about

00:12:20.839 --> 00:12:26.680
AMD's software and I do mean talk about

00:12:24.320 --> 00:12:31.839
it since that's all that AMD has done so far and that's all that they've enabled

00:12:28.399 --> 00:12:34.760
us to do Fidelity FX super resolution 3

00:12:31.839 --> 00:12:41.839
is supposedly finally coming and will contain AMD's implementation of fake

00:12:37.720 --> 00:12:43.720
frame Generation allaha NVIDIA's dlss 3

00:12:41.839 --> 00:12:48.480
we've been waiting nearly a year now for its release and for NVIDIA solution to

00:12:46.240 --> 00:12:52.240
mature to the point where I'm actually kind of worried about team red here we

00:12:50.680 --> 00:12:57.600
weren't able to run it ourselves but they did offer up an example but the one

00:12:54.639 --> 00:13:03.639
they did was under very favorable conditions a 4K 60 video on slow paced

00:13:01.240 --> 00:13:09.199
gameplay that was already pretty close to running at 60 FPS and despite that

00:13:06.839 --> 00:13:14.040
the first impression looks pretty rough to us it's too early to seriously pixel

00:13:12.440 --> 00:13:17.920
Peep and comment on the visual quality from this demo alone and they say it

00:13:16.079 --> 00:13:22.279
will be available in early fall with fores spoken and Immortals of avium so

00:13:20.959 --> 00:13:27.360
hopefully we're going to be able to test it for ourselves soon and it will really

00:13:24.920 --> 00:13:32.560
impress us what we know right now is that this flavor of frame genen dubbed

00:13:29.720 --> 00:13:38.079
fluid motion frames is going to be open and available to run on gpus that do not

00:13:35.320 --> 00:13:44.399
have machine learning or AI accelerators with AMD claims performance that will

00:13:40.720 --> 00:13:46.760
supposedly be similar to dlss 3 so in

00:13:44.399 --> 00:13:52.800
other words when you're comparing native FPS to Native with frame gen you are

00:13:50.120 --> 00:13:56.920
going to be using your GPU compute not the separate AI compute so you will

00:13:54.839 --> 00:14:02.279
expect less than double the frame rate due to that processing overhead like d

00:13:59.600 --> 00:14:08.440
lss3 then AMD recommends that you enable it only to enhance 60fps and higher

00:14:05.720 --> 00:14:13.000
gameplay rather than to make up for very low FPS we will of course be testing

00:14:10.839 --> 00:14:17.920
that as well and we'll also be testing AMD's claims that the Radeon driver can

00:14:15.320 --> 00:14:23.279
enable frame gen on any directx11 and direct X12 title via hyper RX a

00:14:21.560 --> 00:14:27.680
one-click Optimizer feature that was first announced last year now you would

00:14:25.320 --> 00:14:32.000
think that this kind of thing would require at least some input from the

00:14:29.360 --> 00:14:37.160
game engine but maybe AMD's on to something we shall see we can't try it

00:14:34.839 --> 00:14:41.639
yet the other new major feature that's coming with FSR 3 is something that AMD

00:14:39.120 --> 00:14:46.360
is calling native anti-aliasing and this is a competitor to NVIDIA's deep

00:14:43.519 --> 00:14:53.279
learning anti-aliasing both process the native image like FSR or dlss but

00:14:50.160 --> 00:14:54.519
without adjusting the scale and as I

00:14:53.279 --> 00:14:59.040
understand it that would pretty much boil AMD's version down to temporal

00:14:56.680 --> 00:15:02.759
anti- eling as we know and love it but but then with a sharpening pass and the

00:15:01.160 --> 00:15:07.399
comparison image doesn't do much to convince us that there's much else going

00:15:04.480 --> 00:15:13.000
on yes there is more detail than native but that's detail that used to be subtle

00:15:10.240 --> 00:15:16.800
and now kind of looks like noise it is early though and with the latest

00:15:14.480 --> 00:15:20.279
consoles being powered by AMD I'm sure that game devs are going to have some

00:15:18.000 --> 00:15:24.160
interest in helping to dial this in but it really feels like AMD missed an

00:15:22.399 --> 00:15:28.800
opportunity to leverage their AI accelerators and create a true daa

00:15:27.079 --> 00:15:34.639
alternative maybe we'll just have to wait for Intel's XC AA for now all we

00:15:32.560 --> 00:15:40.279
can do is wait and see if these features are worth turning on if we're ever

00:15:37.240 --> 00:15:43.000
allowed to FSR 3's requirements for

00:15:40.279 --> 00:15:48.959
example are a little weird but here's the tldr frame gen is going to be

00:15:45.360 --> 00:15:51.680
supported on Radeon RX 5700 and higher

00:15:48.959 --> 00:15:58.000
or on the team green side the RTX 20 series and higher users of RX 590s or

00:15:55.399 --> 00:16:03.519
GTX 10 series cards can still use the upscaling and native anti-aliasing modes

00:16:00.600 --> 00:16:07.440
though obviously the frame gen in every title feature only works for Radeon

00:16:05.480 --> 00:16:12.440
cards at least until moders get going with projects like cyber FSR and then

00:16:10.000 --> 00:16:15.720
perhaps most importantly consoles should support all of the above which could

00:16:13.959 --> 00:16:19.920
lean to some interesting times ahead if it makes game studios consider rate

00:16:17.399 --> 00:16:24.319
tracing or more complex visuals more often which is enough conversation about

00:16:22.399 --> 00:16:28.639
what could be coming in the future looking at it today a clear winner

00:16:26.440 --> 00:16:35.040
emerges from the current gen competitors the RX 7800 XT the 7700 XT already makes

00:16:33.360 --> 00:16:40.839
NVIDIA's pricing look pants on head stupid and the 7800 XT is on average

00:16:37.839 --> 00:16:43.600
around 20% faster for just 11% more

00:16:40.839 --> 00:16:49.160
currency no-brainer go ahead and buy wise what I would say if it weren't for

00:16:46.160 --> 00:16:52.240
the unfortunate reality that the RX 6800

00:16:49.160 --> 00:16:54.399
XT still exists for now though it's true

00:16:52.240 --> 00:16:59.560
it lacks AI accelerators and it does have slower memory but the performance

00:16:56.759 --> 00:17:04.280
is still there especially in product ity and they're currently priced about the

00:17:01.199 --> 00:17:06.360
same as the 7800 XT which I wouldn't

00:17:04.280 --> 00:17:10.039
necessarily buy it at even just for the longer driver support that you're going

00:17:07.720 --> 00:17:13.360
to get out of a newer card but you can expect them to go lower as they're

00:17:11.280 --> 00:17:18.160
cleared out or if you get one secondhand and they could be a great deal plus if

00:17:15.760 --> 00:17:21.880
you want to get into Starfield all AMD cards come with Starfield Premium

00:17:19.679 --> 00:17:25.880
Edition which is $100 that you're not going to have to spend on top of your

00:17:23.280 --> 00:17:32.320
new GPU that makes NVIDIA's comparative pricing even worse since their bundle of

00:17:29.039 --> 00:17:34.960
game items for a free-to-play game is

00:17:32.320 --> 00:17:40.360
significantly less valuable and less desirable if the Steam Reviews are any

00:17:37.240 --> 00:17:43.280
indication with all that said I don't

00:17:40.360 --> 00:17:47.640
hate this then don't get me wrong while these launch prices are lower than last

00:17:45.240 --> 00:17:52.200
gen in a vacuum they're still inflated for the performance level so unless you

00:17:49.840 --> 00:17:55.840
really need the upgrade now I'd still recommend sticking with what you've got

00:17:53.880 --> 00:18:02.360
or checking out our recent guide on how to buy a secondhand GPU but unlike the

00:17:59.720 --> 00:18:07.400
transparently insulting 4060 series launch from NVIDIA at least this doesn't

00:18:04.799 --> 00:18:14.120
feel like AMD is just spitting in our Collective faces it's not AMD's gift to

00:18:10.240 --> 00:18:17.400
Gamers either it's just fine and I guess

00:18:14.120 --> 00:18:19.039
in times like these that's refreshing

00:18:17.400 --> 00:18:23.919
just like I'm about to refresh your knowledge about our sponsor enlisted

00:18:22.039 --> 00:18:28.159
transport yourself into the battlefield of some of world war II's most iconic

00:18:26.039 --> 00:18:33.159
campaigns within listed the free-to-play first person shooter that blends PVE and

00:18:30.760 --> 00:18:38.400
PVP elements to create a totally immersive combat experience command a

00:18:35.760 --> 00:18:42.480
squad of customizable AI soldiers that you can upgrade and Equip to handle any

00:18:40.520 --> 00:18:46.480
engagement and maybe even eventually feel remorse for their actions with over

00:18:44.919 --> 00:18:51.520
100 weapons and vehicles at your disposal you can choose precisely how to

00:18:49.080 --> 00:18:55.640
neutralize your enemies M1 carbine or Thompson Panzer tank or

00:18:56.000 --> 00:19:02.159
tiger the choice is yours and with someone much variety no firefight will

00:19:00.520 --> 00:19:06.200
feel the same oh you think you're hardcore then the realistic movement and

00:19:04.679 --> 00:19:10.679
damage models will make battles nail-bitingly intense but if you prefer

00:19:08.640 --> 00:19:14.440
more casual gameplay even the most laid-back recruits will still feel like

00:19:12.720 --> 00:19:18.960
they're playing an important role and with crossplay between PC PlayStation

00:19:16.600 --> 00:19:22.520
and Xbox even more players can take part in the action check out and listed using

00:19:20.880 --> 00:19:27.280
the link below and get an exclusive Bonus Pack if you guys enjoyed this

00:19:24.640 --> 00:19:31.720
video go check out our review on the RTX 460 TI for a a little bit more on why

00:19:29.640 --> 00:19:38.159
we've been ragging on that card during this entire video

00:19:33.679 --> 00:19:38.159
it's not good