Skip to content

Amd radeon 6800xt vs 6900xt big navi

Update: See our buy location page for information on the latest AMD GPU:

. So the main discoveries of AMD 6000 series graphics cards have come and gone. The general reaction from the technical community is: We are impressed and still a bit skeptical before we get there, but quietly full of hope. We think the response from the folks at Nvidia is a little less positive. "Rage Mode" and "Smart Access Memory" are two special features that everyone talks about. Quickly read our overview of these two features here.

Now that we have some data, we can compare the two heavyweights in the 6000 series: 6800 XT and 6900 XT, also known as "Big Navi". In terms of specifications, there is not much difference between the two cards, but we will check the improvements AMD has made since the previous generation.

The main focus here will be the difference in FPS performance. There has been discussion about whether the FPS displayed by AMD represents the average FPS or the maximum FPS, because this does not seem to be clearly stated in the presentation. For consumers and AMD, we expect these figures to actually be average FPS; otherwise, once third-party benchmarks are released, they may be strongly opposed. For this reason, we believe that these concerns are unfounded, but, as always, we have reservations about the official FPS data. Our recommendation is to always wait for an independent benchmark test before deciding which card is right for you. We will promptly notify you of the latest leaks.

Now, stop talking nonsense, let's dive in.

As the previous revelations implied, the specifications of the 6800 XT and 6900 XT are very similar, only in the key area of "calculation unit". The main difference between these two charts is.

As previously reported, the specifications of 6800 XT and 6900 XT are very similar, but in the key area of "calculation unit", the main difference between the two is.

For those using higher resolution displays, especially 4K, the memory bottleneck has proven to be an increasingly serious performance issue. Regardless of the graphics card clock speed, if the memory bandwidth is not enough, this often results in a low minimum FPS during benchmarks, even if the average FPS is high, leading to possible game freezes due to significant frame rate fluctuations. Both the 6800 XT and 6900 XT are equipped with an impressive 16GB GDDR6 VRAM, a 16Gbps memory speed, and a 256-bit memory bus.

Although this means that these two AMD cards have higher VRAM than Nvidia's 3080 RTX with less than 10GB of GDDR6, but compared to the 19Gbps memory speed and 320-bit memory bus, their memory video is less. Also, in all three respects, it is lower than the green team's flagship 3090 RTX because it is equipped with 24GB of VRAM, 19.5Gbps of memory speed, and 384-bit memory bus.

Overall, this shows that this means that the 3090 RTX can still be a winner in 4K performance compared to the more powerful AMD card, but AMD claims it has the ability. Based on the technology developed for its Ryzen CPU, AMD's "unlimited cache" clearly allows the CPU to run at 2.17 times the bandwidth, which is 2.17 times greater than what you would normally expect from a memory bus. 256-bit. This means that you can use a smaller bus that is "significantly" better than Nvidia cards in this regard, saving power consumption and heat generation. In any case, the two higher-end AMD cards have the same memory specs.

For those using higher resolution displays, especially 4K, the memory bottleneck has proven to be an increasingly serious performance issue. Regardless of the main frequency of the graphics card, if the video memory bandwidth is not enough, the minimum FPS will often be low in comparison, even if the average FPS is high, causing the game to freeze. The fluctuation is obvious. Both the 6800 XT and 6900 XT are equipped with an impressive 16GB GDDR6 VRAM, 16Gbps memory speed and a 256-bit memory bus.

Although this means that the VRAM of these two AMD cards is higher than Nvidia's 10GB GDDR6 3080 RTX, but compared to 19Gbps memory speed and 320-bit memory bus, they are lower. In addition, they are inferior to the Green Team’s flagship model 3090 RTX in these three aspects, because it is equipped with 24GB of VRAM, 19.5Gbps memory speed and 384-bit memory bus.

This usually means that compared to more powerful AMD cards, the 3090 RTX may still be a winner in 4K performance, but AMD claims to have a trick. Based on the technology developed for its Ryzen CPU, AMD's "unlimited cache" clearly allows the CPU to run at 2.17 times the bandwidth, which is 2.17 times greater than what you would normally expect from a memory bus. 256-bit. This means that you can use a smaller bus that is "significantly" better than Nvidia cards in this regard, saving power consumption and heat generation. In any case, the two higher-end AMD cards have the same memory specs.

is similar to its Ryzen processor, AMD managed to get great efficiency out of its next-gen graphics card. Part of the reason is that using the aforementioned infinite cache allows for a smaller memory bus. Additionally, improvements in computer unit manufacturing and other developments have increased performance per watt by 54% over the previous generation.

Now claims to have improved performance between 6800 XT and 6900

The heat. In fact, the smaller of the two cards, the recommended power supply for the 6800 XT is 750W, while the 6900 XT requires 850W. However, through some unknown mysterious scientific methods, the two cards have the same "TDP" (Thermal Design Capability). Although TDP is a problematic metric and cannot really be used when comparing AMD and Nvidia, it is usually an accurate representation between cards in the same series, so the same number between the two cards is interesting. In any case, it is recommended to wait until independent testers use these two components to see if this is indeed the case, or if the 6900 XT requires an improved cooling solution compared to the 6800 XT.

is similar to its Ryzen processor, AMD managed to get great efficiency out of its next-gen graphics card. Part of the reason is that using the aforementioned infinite cache allows for a smaller memory bus. Additionally, improvements in computer unit manufacturing and other developments have increased performance per watt by 54% over the previous generation.

Now, with the stated performance improvement between 6800 XT and 6900 XT (more on that later), I would expect the power consumption to increase at the same time, and considering that both GPUs use the same cooling solution, the heat output is older. In fact, the smaller of the two cards, the recommended power supply for the 6800 XT is 750 W, while the 6900 XT requires 850 W. However, through some unknown mysterious scientific methods, the two cards have the same "TDP" (Thermal Design Capability). Although TDP is a troublesome indicator and cannot really be used when comparing AMD and Nvidia, it is usually an accurate representation between cards in the same series, so the same number between the two cards is interesting. In any case, it is recommended to wait until independent testers use these two components to see if this is indeed the case, or if the 6900 XT requires an improved cooling solution compared to the 6800 XT.

Although there is news that the Big Navi card has a higher gaming clock frequency of 2,040MHz and a boost clock of 2,330MHz, the 6900XT and 6800XT actually have a gaming clock of 2,015 MHz and a clock of 2,250 MHz boost. AMD didn't give us the traditional "Base" clock speed measurement. Similar to how boost speed becomes quite a technical measure, it rarely represents how often the GPU will hit when it completes most processes. The "base" clock is a very low rate that is rarely reached even on an idle computer. The "gaming" clock is AMD's way of trying to give an indication of the speed the GPU is expected to achieve during a typical game; obviously, the question of how this will translate into reality remains to be determined before a third party can prove this. For most people.

Similarly, before we see more test data, we don't know how long each card will be able to keep the pulse clock. Some previous generation AMD cards rarely managed to increase the speed and were unable to maintain them for a period of time to improve performance. It is hoped that the speed of these two new cards is not just marketing technology. The number of

computing units is the area where the specifications of the two cards are different, from the 72 cores of the 6800 RX to the 80 cores of the 6900 RX is a significant increase (over 11%). The additional capabilities of the more expensive cards stem from this.

As far as we know, both cards have the same software. The aforementioned Rage mode and smart access memory will be provided to owners of two cards with the latest Ryzen 5000 series processors and AM4 motherboards. Both GPUs will use the new "Radeon Boost" and "Radeon AntiLag" technologies to increase response time and reduce latency. These two graphics cards will also be fully compatible with "DirectX 12 Ultimate" - this means that compatibility means that they will support mesh shading, variable speed shading, and sampler feedback. Although DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling) will remain Nvidia's unique technology, AMD revealed that they have developed their own ray tracing technology and more details will appear in the near future. You can expect both cards to be used this feature, though it remains to see how it will compare to Nvidia's own implementation.

In the final analysis, regardless of the technical similarities between the two cards, people are interested in performance. At this stage, we only have AMD's own benchmarks, which are completed on a FPS basis. More third-party technical benchmarks are expected next month.

is unusual in that AMD did not show 1080p performance on any graphics card released on October 28, using 1440p as the minimum resolution. Whether you're trying to hide the poor performance compared to Nvidia products at this resolution, or just acknowledging that the next-gen GPU will bring the normal baseline gaming display to 1440p next year, there's only time ( and an independent third-party benchmarking) Will say.

According to AMD, below we can see the 1440p performance of the RX 6800 XT calculated at FPS in many games. The Nvidia RTX 3080, which is priced at over $ 50, was used as a comparison. According to the final notes, both cards were tested with Ryzen 5900 X and AM4 motherboards.

Although we wanted to compare this performance with the performance of the 6900 XT playing the same game at 1440p, we only saw the FPS performance of the RX 6900 XT at 4K resolution; we will have to wait for the arrival of the first independent benchmark

For the intended use of two GPUs: 6900 XT, like its competitor Nvidia RTX 3090, is designed with the use of 4K in mind. If you are a gamer playing 1440p or 1080p, then of course you only use one screen, and then compared to 6800 XT's extra $350 seems to be an unnecessary event. If you are considering running two or more monitors at 1440p, the 6900 XT may be worth it, but there are other factors here: sampling and super-sampling efficiency determine how multiple monitors work, not just the original specifications. This can range from game to game, application to application.

We can safely assume that the 6900 XT will outperform the 6800 XT at 1440p and 1080p because it has more computing units, but the question of how much is $350. If the past versions of AMD and Nvidia are any guide, the lower the resolution ratio between the improved Big Navi and its smaller sibling, the less important it is, so the performance difference you get at 1440p may be more than yours Small. It will be done in 4k, even less in 1080p than in 1440p.

is unusual in that AMD did not display 1080p performance on any graphics card released on October 28, using 1440p as the minimum resolution. Whether it is trying to cover up the poor performance at this resolution compared to Nvidia products, or just recognizing that the next generation of GPUs will make normal baseline game displays closer to 1440p in the next few years. One year, only time (and a third-party independent benchmark). ) Will say.

Next, we can see the FPS 1440p performance of the RX 6800 XT in various games, according to AMD. The more expensive $50 Nvidia RTX 3080 was used for comparison. According to the final instructions, both cards were tested using Ryzen 5900 X with AM4 motherboard.

Although we want to compare this performance with the performance of the 6900 XT playing the same game at 1440p, we only show the FPS performance of the RX 6900 XT at 4K resolution; we will have to wait for the first independent benchmark to appear, Only then can we understand this.

In the end, although this reinforces the difference in the intended use of the two GPUs, the 6900 XT, like its competitor Nvidia RTX 3090, was designed with the use of 4K in mind, if you are a gamer who plays at 1440p or 1080p. yes, only one screen is used, and then it costs $ 350 more than the 6800 XT, which seems like an unnecessary luxury. If you're considering operating two or more displays at 1440p, the 6900 XT may come in handy, but there are other factors at play here: sampling and supersampling efficiency determine performance across multiple displays. Rather than just the original specs, this may vary from game to game, application to application.

We can safely assume that the 6900 XT will outperform the 6800 XT at 1440p and 1080p because it has more compute units, but the question of how much is $ 350. If the earlier versions of AMD and Nvidia are instructive, then the improvement between Big Navi And its younger brother will become less noticeable as its resolution ratio decreases, so its performance difference at 1440p may be less than that of your teenager at 4k, or even less at 1080p than at 1440p.

Although 4K performance is not a feature of real interest to the vast majority of gamers in today's market, it is becoming a new standard for manufacturers to show the best performance of their hardware at its limits. This is an area where AMD is expected to fight Nvidia in this regard. Nvidia's Ampere architecture and its plethora of shaders work well on 4K resolution displays, but if AMD's results are to be believed, it looks like they're at At the very least, they can maintain their own strength, and at best they can beat. your competitors.

The following are AMD published performance data for these two graphics cards. According to the endnotes, both cards were tested when using the Ryzen 5900X CPU and the AM4 motherboard. Unfortunately, AMD did not show off the (sneaky) 6900 XT without Rage mode enabled or smart memory access, raising the question of whether this indicates that its performance will be disappointing. For whatever reason, we cannot compare the performance of the two cards with these features disabled based on current information.

Although 4K performance is not a feature of actual interest to the vast majority of gamers on the market today, it is becoming a new standard for manufacturers to demonstrate the best performance of their hardware at its limits. This is the area where AMD is expected to compete with Nvidia. Nvidia's Ampere architecture and its large number of shaders do perform well in 4K resolution displays, although if AMD's results can be trusted, they seem to end up being less. , In the best case, outperforms its competitors.

The following is the performance data of the two graphics cards announced by AMD. According to the endnotes, both cards were tested using Ryzen 5900X CPU and AM4 motherboard. Unfortunately, AMD did not show the 6900 XT without Rage mode or smart memory access (disguise), which begs the question whether this indicates that its performance will be disappointing. For whatever reason, we cannot compare the performance of the two cards with these features disabled based on current information.

: 4 way

With a little bit of number magic (basic mathematics), we can obtain FPS comparison charts for all six games with comparable data based on a given percentage.

Unsurprisingly, the RX 6900 XT performs better of the two, although whether these FPS gains are sufficient to justify the cost increase is entirely up to you, the buyer.

You will notice that the image above does not clearly indicate the FPS of the RX 6800 XT with Rage mode and smart memory access enabled. However, with some number magic (basic mathematics), we can obtain FPS comparison charts for all six games with comparable data based on a given percentage.

Unsurprisingly, the RX 6900 XT performs better of the two, although whether these FPS gains are sufficient to justify the cost increase is entirely up to you, the buyer.

"Big Navi", like its rival Nvidia, is the best card for enthusiasts. For those who are not a problem when buying a PC, if (still a big yes at this stage) this performance data is credible, then they must have successfully challenged the 3090 RTX at a low price of $ 500. Rage mode The smart memory access especially means that to fully get this gain, you have to pair the card with one of the latest Ryzen CPUs, but the current price of the Ryzen 5900X is $ 549, which is a total difference of $ US. 49 as claimed by AMD Superior performance (compared to Nvidia GPU and Intel CPU). When

compares the 6900 RX to the 6800 RX, it becomes a more personal choice. If your needs are purely for 1080p or 1440p gaming, it seems difficult to justify spending $ 350 compared to the 4K numbers we can get today, because it can show that FPS performance is less improved. Better to spend this money elsewhere for the full build, maybe for a new SSD or for a new display.

For 4K gamers, the question is: "Is the extra FPS gain at this resolution worth my money?" For those considering operating multiple 1440p monitors, maybe even two 4K monitors for workstations and games , We strongly recommend waiting for independent testing in the future, because these data are not currently available at all.

As always, the longer the time, the clearer the image, and we always recommend waiting for an independent benchmark test. However, if you have to buy it now, or you may be worried about inventory issues and want to put these cards in before they run out-for those with deep pockets who must have the best technology, then AMD Radeon 6900 RX seems to be the one An excellent card. For everyone who wants to buy an enthusiast card, we recommend AMD Radeon 6800 RX.

Previous article Flight simulator intro games hardware

Leave a comment

Comments must be approved before appearing

* Required fields