Important preliminary remark
In the end, there are only specially selected games, but I have chosen these from over 20 titles and the pre-tests with two cards as examples, because the result was almost exactly the same in the end. The weighting between the titles with pure raster graphics without DXR and with DXR was done in a ratio of 6:4, whereby the four DXR titles are very different. Full ray tracing fun in Cyberpunk 2077, combined with more medium-heavy effects such as in Metro Exodus EE and the hybrid implementation of the lighting, through to Marvel’s Guardians of the Galaxy and Shadow of the Tomb Raider, where ray tracing really only comes into play in a human way.
DXR is being implemented in more and more games and almost all of the current engines now support it. From this point of view, it would be just as unfair to do without it completely as to use such titles exclusively with DXR. Since every user has different preferences and some would rather do without DXR completely (why would they?), I am accommodating all target groups by mixing things up a bit.
Sum of all games
The XFX Mercury RX 7900 XTX Magnetic Air 24 GB is faster in QHD than AMD’s reference card and just as fast as the GeForce RTX 4080 Super FE with reference specifications. The picture now looks like the reference card from AMD can be clearly beaten by 2.1 percentage points, which should of course be due to the higher power limit and the slightly better cooling. The GeForce RTX 4080 FE is already 2.6 percentage points behind.
The P1 Low, on the other hand, is a different story. The card is now 1.7 percentage points behind the GeForce RTX 4080 Super FE. The reasons for this lie in the few games with DXR, where the RDNA3 cards do not cut the best figure.
But what about the power consumption? On average, the XFX Mercury RX 7900 XTX Magnetic Air 24 GB is now clearly ahead, or rather clearly behind in terms of efficiency. Almost 82 watts more than a GeForce RTX 4080 Super FE already has a slight crowbar feeling. But it’s still just about okay.
That’s it for WQHD and let’s see if anything changes in Ultra HD. Turn the page please!
- 1 - Einführung, technische Daten und Technologie
- 2 - Test Setup
- 3 - Teardown: PCB, Topologie und Komponenten
- 4 - Teardown: Lüftersystem und Kühler
- 5 - Teardown: Material-Analyse
- 6 - Gaming Performance WQHD (2560 x 1440)
- 7 - Gaming Performance Ultra-HD (3840 x 2160)
- 8 - Gaming Performance FSR vs. DLSS
- 9 - Details: Leistungsaufnahme und Lastverteilung
- 10 - Lastspitzen, Kappung und Netzteilempfehlung
- 11 - Temperaturen, Taktraten und Infrarot-Analyse
- 12 - Lüfterkurven und Lautstärke
- 13 - Zusammenfassung und Fazit
23 Antworten
Kommentar
Lade neue Kommentare
Urgestein
Urgestein
Veteran
Urgestein
1
Urgestein
Urgestein
Mitglied
Mitglied
Urgestein
Veteran
Urgestein
Urgestein
1
Mitglied
Veteran
Mitglied
Urgestein
Mitglied
Alle Kommentare lesen unter igor´sLAB Community →