Leaked Gaming Benchmarks Show AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT Beating NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 in Various Titles

Tsing

The FPS Review
Staff member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Messages
13,407
Points
113
amd-radeon-rx-6700-xt-render-adjusted-1024x576.jpg
Image: AMD



AMD’s newly announced RDNA 2 graphics card, the Radeon RX 6700 XT, measures up to NVIDIA’s GeForce RTX 3070 pretty well in regard to general gaming performance. This is according to leaked DirectX11 and DirectX12 1440p benchmarks published by Wccftech, which show red team’s GPU beating out its Ampere-based counterpart in a variety of titles that include Assassin’s Creed Odyssey (81 vs. 69 FPS), Battlefield V (149 vs. 136 FPS), and Immortals Fenyx Rising (104 vs. 94 FPS). AMD’s Radeon RX 6700 XT also appears to be definitively faster than NVIDIA’s GeForce RTX 3060 Ti but struggles to match either of green team’s GPUs when ray tracing is entered into the equation.



“The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT is just a week away from launch and our sources have provided us with a list of gaming and raytracing performance benchmarks for the upcoming RDNA 2 graphics...
Click to expand...

Continue reading...


 
- No DLSS
- Ray Tracing?
- Availability?
- WCCFTECH....LOL
 
Well, lots of ppl thought the 5700XT was a better deal than the RTX2070S too......whatever..

Also doesnt look like there will be any price jebaiting this time.
 
For me, the only real question is availability. And with Ethereum still not on PoS and riding high, pretty much no matter what AMD does, this card will be scarce on the shelves, even if AMD had dedicated all their Fab allocation toward it (which I am positive they have not).

DLSS/RT - I'm still not sold on all that as worth paying a lot more for, or worth sacrificing rasterization performance for. Same boat with GSync honestly. I'm sure it's nice, and I'd rather have it than not, but not holding out for it, and not paying extra for it.
 
Brian_B said:
DLSS/RT - I'm still not sold on all that as worth paying a lot more for, or worth sacrificing rasterization performance for.
Click to expand...
A lot, nope, but 5% to 10% more? Or $50 more? Absolutely.

Brian_B said:
Same boat with GSync honestly. I'm sure it's nice, and I'd rather have it than not, but not holding out for it, and not paying extra for it.
Click to expand...
Any VRR is better than no VRR, but strictly speaking, now that Nvidia is doing the certification for VRR themselves, that's basically what I'm looking for. A G-Sync module would be nice as it guarantees a minimum level of capability across the board and at a level that is usually in excess of what 'Freesync' monitors usually include, but realistically as long as Nvidia has declared a monitor good enough, it's good enough.

Otherwise I'd need to see significant independent testing to make sure that the manufacturer didn't cheap out on something.
 
LazyGamer said:
A lot, nope, but 5% to 10% more? Or $50 more? Absolutely.


Any VRR is better than no VRR, but strictly speaking, now that Nvidia is doing the certification for VRR themselves, that's basically what I'm looking for. A G-Sync module would be nice as it guarantees a minimum level of capability across the board and at a level that is usually in excess of what 'Freesync' monitors usually include, but realistically as long as Nvidia has declared a monitor good enough, it's good enough.

Otherwise I'd need to see significant independent testing to make sure that the manufacturer didn't cheap out on something.
Click to expand...

My Aorus monitor is freesync, but G-Sync works perfectly fine one it. Then again, I'd kind of expect that from the price point my monitor is in. The cheaper freesync monitors probably not.
 
Riccochet said:
My Aorus monitor is freesync, but G-Sync works perfectly fine one it. Then again, I'd kind of expect that from the price point my monitor is in. The cheaper freesync monitors probably not.
Click to expand...
I think that it's important to note, that despite Nvidia's 'marketing' on the point, it's not really G-Sync if there isn't a G-Sync module in the display.

That you state that 'G-Sync works perfectly fine on my Freesync monitor' does point to their marketing working pretty well :)

Brian_B said:
$50 more and 20% slower rasterization? No
Click to expand...
I'd have a hard time swallowing that one myself if I were interested in the highest frametimes.

Of course, I usually have other needs that AMD tends to fall short on at the moment, though I do try to continually reevalute those relative to all available market players when I need to purchase something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Become a Patron!
Back
Top