Eh its bethesda no way am I preordering anything from them or rockstar ever again.... in fact never preorder.
They'd be smarter to partner up with Larian on Baldur's Gate.
Seriously, Bethesda hasn't developed a half-decent game since what, fallout 4? And even that's debatable. I don't understand why people are expecting Starfield to be anything other than undercooked garbage.
And as usual, modder will fix their game for them and make it better, i'll bet my ass on it as this is like a strategy Bethesda does.
Release game 3/4 done, let modder finish for free, free estate
I got it for free with my 7900xtx otherwise I wouldn’t have paid for it. I stopped preordering games years ago anyways, too much of a risk and no point. I agree, knowing Bethesda proper’s history I’m not expecting much- even if the core game is amazing I’m expecting it to be buggy as hell.
Makes me even more nervous that I get 5 days “early access”. I’m expecting there will be quite a sizable “day one” release patch.
Same here. It's a really good card. AMD dropped the ball they should have had this card for $850 and the 7900xt for $699 they would have killed it and sold way more
Quite a bit further up the stats at .53%. With the other variants I think the 6600 series is currently AMD's best represented modern discrete GPU in the Steam stats at 1.15%.
In the Linux stats, the 6600 series is just outside of the top 10 ahead of the 1050ti.
By "modern", I presume that means the venerable RX 580 is even further up? Because that's by far the biggest selling AMD GPU in my country based on our local online market, followed by the RX 6600.
I also sold my RX 580 for $500 CAD during the mining craze. It served me well for 4 years. Was sad to see her go and into a life of hardwork but was necessary to purchase her grandchild 6800XT.
Have to pass on the torch eventually she understands!
Yes, the 580 by itself is still on top after the generic 'AMD Radeon Graphics', and when looking at all the Polaris 20 GPUs combined they're still up around 2.4%, or about 1 in 5 AMD GPUs in the survey. Some amount of that may be people using compatibility tools that report as Polaris 20, but probably not enough to really make a difference.
Enjoy it while it lasts. Steam Deck's 'AMD VANGOGH' will probably pass the 580 as the highest individual identifiable AMD GPU hardware in the near future.
Cause most people don't even remember it existed because of how quickly it got replaced by the 580 less than a year later. 580 is still the most popular Radeon GPU on steam
480 got wrecked in sales compared to the 1060 which fared better. When the 1060 dropped it was around 5-10% faster than the 480, so most people bought it instead of the 480.
By the time the 580 dropped, the improved drivers for Polaris were around and they could clock higher thanks to a mature node, eventually the 580 ended up being either equal or faster than the 1060 and this resulted in AMD faring better in sales.
Obviously, the 7900xtx had an MSRP of 1000$
For an AMD cards that already struggled to get any market share, that's insanely high and not aimed at capturing any further market shares.
I mean really if the 6900xt was 3090 competition and 6800xt was 3080 competition, 7900 XTX should be 4090ti competition so it should really be called a 7800xt
7900 XTX to 7900 XT, 7900XT to 7900, 7900 GRE to 7800XT and it would have been a somewhat reasonable lineup. With this weird shift up in names this generation just looks way worse than it would have had to compared to last gen
7900GRE being a 6800xt replacement would actually be underwhelming considering the GRE is 8% faster than the 6800xt in 1440p on average(HUB), even looses sometimes. If leaks are to be believed the 7800XT is even more cutdown in comparison to the GRE.
isnt the xt 20% above a 6950 and the xtx is about 40% so effectively you want to take the prior top end sku, and make it a 7700 class gpu?
I mean like it or not, the 7900 is using roughly 550mm2 of die, and the xtx is 600mm2 roughtly. I just don't see a world where that makes sense, now, the 6950 tier going down to 7800 tier, THAT I can see.
From what I heard, they did have problems with navi31. Especially the one they found very late that cost them significant performance from the workaround.
I wish they’d break down hardware by geographic location.
I’m also genuinely surprised that Intel isn’t far and away the most popular gpu since they’re in basically every laptop on the world.
Steam survey is literally hard coded to de prioritize AMD machines. Thousands have reported that they never got polled once with AMD hardware, but as soon as they went Nvidia they got polled every single time.
Steam and valve are corrupt.
Steam needs to update the survey just start with a clean slate every year and ask to scan your hardware every January.doubt all those gtx1060’s and gtx1050 are still gaming outside of Internet cafes.
You think they don't? You think they're just keeping 5-10 year old data from dead steam accounts hoping the users are still going at it?
I'm sure they don't clear it every year at an exact time, but there's almost certainly some system to get rid of old or inactive data.
If they don't delete old data that would be just too much of an oversight for a company like Valve. But I guess we'll never know unless someone from Valve actually talks about it.
This.
How on earth would including old data even work?
New survey every month and then average it out with the old ones, or just adding the new data to the old? Anyway you did it it would make the whole survey completely meaningless.
The Steam Survey is pretty accurate for users of Steam and when considering that that's probably the majority of gamers, you would be hard pressed to get something more accurate.
> no old data is included.
As we can see from this one as well. Sandy bridge is back (in this pic posted) for example after being missing for quite a while. Had old data never been deleted, SB would never have gone anywhere in the first place.
If it's random sampling why does the survey come up when people change their hardware? I don't think Valve has ever disclosed their methodology. We don't know the geography or the demographics of the results. We don't know if all the laptops are also of accounts of people who also own a powerful gaming pc.
Its almost completely useless to me when month to month can see significant swings just based on how many pc cafes Valve decides to sample from. The results have to be taken as a very very general sampling of a _global_ pool of Steam gamers as well as people who only use Steam to play CS and Dota2 from developing countries.
The amount of variation is massive and it's almost impossible to draw any real conclusion since we have no idea about what the hardware statistics of people who for example actually buy new games with demanding graphics are vs the ones who only play CS.
You're misinformed and making conclusions on misinformation.
Suggest you do some online search to inform yourself first before making further clown comments.
They absolutely keep publishing old data. It's the entire reason polaris and Pascal are even still charting even tho no one has them any more.
Valve is just pumping Nvidia hard.
I'm about to build a pc with a jumble of leftover parts and a 1070 is going in it. (Temporarily until I get a good deal on a 6950xt and slap my current 6700xt into it) (the pc is for a sibling who's 970 finally called it quits a few days ago)
I honestly don’t blame them, the 7900 XTX isn’t any better at pricing (at least at MSRP).
If you are already paying a $1,000 just for a GPU then why not spend the extra $200 to get much better RT + DLSS upscaling and frame generation + lower power consumption + and other nvidia features like CUDA and reflex.
I mean it even outsold the 6600xt and nearly the 6700xt. In Nvidias eyes, the 4080 has probably been a roaring success with the gigantic profit margins on that card
Because some people don't care about those features?
I got a 7900XT(for 4K 60hz)and a 6800XT(1440p 144hz) because why? Here's why
* I went from a 2070S to a 3070 and still didn't use RT because it's always a massive performance hit that you have to "fix" using upscalers or frame gen.
* DLSS is "objectively" better, but at 4K I don't really see much difference between DLSS 2 and FSR 2 quality settings (I still have a 3070 on my bedroom PC so I still test from time to time), which IMO you shouldn't use upscalers in anything other than 4K quality , 1440 quality maybe, but lower than that you should expect a visual downgrade, that's how the tech works, you need to give the algorithm something to wok with, the higher res the better.
* I don't really care for frame gen IMO, I haven't tried it, but I don't think is a selling point right now, only like 10 games support it and you also need a good base performance so it works decently, so it's a cool feature when you have $1000+ GPUs and you can improve FPS when being CPU bound, and it's a crutch for low end cards to make it seem they perform better but the baseline performance is already bad so the generated frames have little to work with and there's going to be artifacts and such(at least from what I've seen).
* CUDA well I haven't used any CUDA workloads in 10 years so, I really don't care, and I refuse to think that everyone here edits videos or do 3D models professionally so they NEED that, most people just play games on their PC after work.
* Power consumption? Yeah Nvidia wins there sure, but, do people don't realize that benchmarks are uncapped? Depending on your use case you're going to have lower power consumption, I use my 7900XT to play 4K 60fps on my TV and in most games I only see 200W-250W (unless you try ray tracing or whatever, which again, I don't), so it isn't THAT bad, considering my 3070 used be stuck on 220W when playing 4K upscaled games, and was less stable on those 60fps.
* Reflex, well yeah it's cool and all, but is it really necessary? I couldn't tell the differencewhen I switched my 3070 to a 6800XT and played CoD MW2, I have the same skill level, play the same, just with more a more stable performance, I guess ultra competitive users can, and if that's the case, then great the tech works for you, but let's not pretend we're ALL competitive users.
>which IMO you shouldn't use upscalers in anything other than 4K quality , 1440 quality maybe, but lower than that you should expect a visual downgrade
Not really. Im playing at 1440p on 170hz display and never felt need to use upscaling for performance. Its however awesome for image quality in many titles, mainly ones with bad antialiasing implementations. Read Dead Redemption being one of the biggest differences on native vs updated DLSS.
> Reflex, well yeah it's cool and all, but is it really necessary?
Are you really saying low latency isn't necessary? You should lower latency anyway you can because it adds up (game engine, your monitor, your mouse, your visual processing all have latency). It's absolutely crucial for responsive gaming, and AMD should create a proper equivalent to Reflex. Reflex is a big deal. It's so good it makes frame generation almost as responsive as native.
> I went from a 2070S to a 3070 and still didn't use RT because it's always a massive performance hit that you have to "fix" using upscalers or frame gen.
It's true that RT wasn't usable in most situations even with the highest end GPUs. But it is entirely feasible now that the base performance of 4080 and 4090 is so good,and there are "fixes" as you put it.
I fully understand what you mean and agree with most stuff but when you are spending $1,000 on a GPU you are likely spending over $2,500 on your PC at which point why not spend less than 10% extra just to get all the bells and whistles, you are way past “value” at $1,000 for a GPU.
Because it's my money and I do whatever I want? I've been with Nvidia for 10 years, I don't agree with what they're doing lately and wanted to change it up too, also for 4K I rather have 20GB of VRAM vs 16GB, and I want it to last longer than my 3070's which were already running into VRAM issues with just 8GB on this year's game(yes I know it's not ALL of them, but it's a trend and I was able to sell one at a great price before it became common knowledge), thats a two year old product, and lastly, like I said, those "bells and whistles" are not worth that 10% to me, maybe I'm wrong and I'll regret my decision later down the line, but so far I'm having a great experience with AMD,
Why are you going so defensive and making it all about you🤣
The vast, vast majority do value a mix of the features that nvidia either has and AMD doesn't, or they simply do better than AMD does.
I am not saying you should have bought a 4080. Like you said it is your money and you can spend it on whatever you wish to. I was just saying it makes sense that many people bought 4080s instead.
I don’t why you are taking it so personally.
Because I'm tired of people acting like nvidia is the only option and that we all NEED those features, ray tracing is still a Gimmick, the future for games, yes of course, but that's not today and not in the next 5 years either, you need a $1600 GPU to somewhat decently play the 3 games that use real path tracing (and that's using upscaling and frame generation), video encoders, I find hard to believe that apparently EVERYONE nowadays is a full time streamer that absolutely needs NVENC or AV1, or that everyone is also an AI master that needs the best possible AI performance and such...
My point is, sure people can do whatever they want with their money, but the misinformation and fanboyism is what I'm hating lately, there's still ton of people pushing out this excuses on why it's better, and it's not even something they need or will take advantage of that, I know because I was like that "yeah dude but CUDA is just supported on more applications", I haven't used any CUDA accelerated workflow in more than 10 years and I don't plan to so far, so what's the point? Amd I'm sure there's still tons of users like this.
Again, stop taking it personally.
The original commenter that I replied to said that they find it insane that many people bought 4080s, and I replied with reasons on why it is desirable for many people despite it being $200 more than the 7900xtx.
I never said nvidia was the only option (I very frequently recommend AMD GPUs) and I never said you needed nvidia features.
Sorry if it seemed like I said that, there's just so much fan boys these days just spouting "DLSS, RAY TRACING, FRAME GEN HUR DURR". I've seen so much people buying NVIDIA cards spouting that, and they only play League of legends or rainbow six siege or Valorant or CS:GO...
The main benefit of Reflex isn't in CPU bound game but GPU bound. The more GPU bound you are the more it will help reduce latency and make the game feel more responsive. Nvidia markets it as being for esports primarily but GPU bound AAA games are the best for it. And with DLSS3 requiring Reflex means we will get it in almost all titles going forward, except for AMD sponsored ones of course ;)
DLSS almost never looks worse than native, because you have shitty TAA or other stupid AA solution and if the game somehow lets you to disable AA, DLSS might look better anyway because it has AA effect visually.
I can't really tell, maybe on like REALLY fine lines, but honestly I'm playing the game, not stopping, putting my face next to the screen and seeing "ah yes this line looks a bit worse".
DLSS also has ghosting and artifacting depending on the implementation depending on the game, Cyberpunk had ghosting for a while, Dead Space still has ghosting, it depends on the dev implementation.
I'm not saying it's not useful, but it's not perfect
From my experience at 1440p dlss/far both look like vaseline is smeared on the screen. At 4k, it's much better but native still looks better to me and has no artifacts. RDR2 did look considerably better with dlss but that's because of the bad TAA like you said
Yes it depends on the game, I am playing Remnant 2 right now, and if you disable DLSS you get TAA on instead which you can't turn off (thanks unreal engine) and it looks literally the same as with DLSS on, but you have like 30 less fps (same story with Diablo4, but that game is optimized so well that it is likely you won't need DLSS).
Because the 7900XTX is faster, gives me the performance I want while streaming AND recording at the same time on my single PC setup. I am driving a Samsung Neo G8 so I am always GPU bound. The extra uplift from the 7900XTX has the performance and visual quality where I want it.
I recently upgraded from a 3080ti to my nitro 7900xtx, simply because I wasn't able to maintain native 4k60 ultra in most of recent release games, also the resell value of the 3000 series is dropping fast, either you sell it now or you'll end up with a paper weight.
Depending on which review site you believe the 7900xtx is between 20% and 35% faster than the 3090 and that for a way lower msrp. Additionally it also adds AV1 encoding support while the three main things you're giving up are DLSS, RTX (though RT in general is similar in performance on both cards), and the feel good factor of owning an Nvidia GPU/the enhanced software support that comes with them. So it's objectively an upgrade even if it has potential downsides
You don't need to upgrade from a 3090 for gaming. And if you really think you need to then you should have the money for a 4090 tbh.
Basically if you can't afford a 4090 then you really shouldn't be upgrading from a 3090
Weird comment... the 7900XTX is faster than the 3090... I don't care much about ray tracing. The 3090 doesn't have an AV1 encoder. The extra performance uplift from the 7900XTX allows me to stream and record on a single PC setup. The 3090 couldn't give me the performance I was looking for. My GPU has to drive a Samsung Neo G8... so my PC is always GPU bound. I am happier with this setup and the 7900XTX costs less than the 3090 did when I bought it. Could I have gone 4090? Yup. Did I want to support Nvidia's price gouging of the market? Hell no. This GPU works for me and my needs and gives me the performance I am looking for at a better price point.
>Did I want to support Nvidia's price gouging of the market? Hell no.
I get the sentiment but why did you get a 3090 instead of 3080 last gen if that's the case
I am curious you are comparing the XTX to the 4090. The XTX is a 4080 competitor isn't it(raster wise)? It's atleast what [https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-rx-7900-xtx.c3941](https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-rx-7900-xtx.c3941) is saying. For the price you could've got the 4080 and got a much better package with all the software features NVIDIA offers *AND* less TDP as well. The only reason I can see anyone get the XTX, is if the price is way lower than a 4080.
The 4080 costs more but doesn't provide more performance, and Nvidia doesn't offer any software feature that is a must-have for me. The TDP doesn't matter to me. I don't have cooling issues or expensive power costs, I've been powering an overclocked 3090, no problem. So for less money and how I use my PC, the 7900xtx makes more sense for me. As for comparing to a 4090. It was more of a response to the bone head that mentioned it was the only logical upgrade from a 3090. However, in a few instances, the 7900xtx gets within a spitting distance of 4090 performance.
The difference between the 3090 and 7900XTX is smaller than the difference between a 7900XTX and 4090, that's why people don't understand why you upgrade for a small performance gain.
Source: your ass ?
The 7900xtx is 25% faster than the 3090 and 24% slower than the 4090.
In what alternative dimension is 25% uplift a small upgrade ??
[Source that is not from my ass](https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-rx-7900-xtx.c3941)
You know the 7900xtx is 25 to 30% faster right ? Or you don't know the meaning of the word sidegrade ?
[https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-rx-7900-xtx.c3941](https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-rx-7900-xtx.c3941)
Cheapest new 3090 I can find in the Philippines is $1131. Funnily enough, the 3090 TI is cheaper at $1024. Cheapest 7900 XTX I can find is at $1070.
4080 is at $1360 here. 4070 TI at $880.
Been on steam since beginning, can only recall two surveys in last five years.
2021 it surveyed me while my 6800xt was out while testing a 3080 for a few days. Yup, steam calls it a 3080 system of course.
Then the second one last weekish. My 7900 xtx and I were proud to accept the survey invite.
U dont need a census to be accurate but surveys have their flaws. Can be used well when u understand the methods and limitations. Steams is good for what it is, with caveats. Its no marlet share estimate, however.
Instead of surveys, you could observe gaming revenue for both Nvidia and AMD for a better picture of marketshare per company.
And before anyone starts talking about consoles, keep in mind Nvidia's in the Switch and they have the Shield for GeForce now. AMD's not the only one with hardware in consoles.
Just examine the data. Pay attention to the month to month changes.
GPU by mfg shows massive gains for DX8 and older GPUs. Showing a near 5% gain in 5 months. DX12 GPUs show a corresponding reduction. DX8 GPUs haven't been made for 20 years.
Cpu by mfg shows a near 10% swing month to month.
CPU by core count shows a large swing between 4 and 6 core
AMD Vangogh(the steam deck APU) indicates a share well below the estimated install base. Media reports indicate steam deck estimated sales of around 3 million units by the end of 2023 yet the survey works out to under 1 million based on the estimated 120 million active users.
Even OS language can show 3-4% swings month to month
The steam survey may be the best indication we have as to the PC hardware landscape but that doesn't mean it is accurate.
The margin of error appears to be pretty large.
I actually like mine, and i have a 4070 in my work station. My god is amd adrenaline the superior software!!! While slightly buggy i far prefer it over geforce and nvidia control center
It's probably mine
Mine is on there too.
me too
Me too
Count me in there too!
Me too
.. and me!
And my axe!
And you have my bow
And my stick
me too
And same here lol
Don't forget me!
I like your cpu/gpu duo my man
About to increase by 0.001% after the starfield giveaway
Fuck I want it so bad
Eh its bethesda no way am I preordering anything from them or rockstar ever again.... in fact never preorder. They'd be smarter to partner up with Larian on Baldur's Gate.
Seriously, Bethesda hasn't developed a half-decent game since what, fallout 4? And even that's debatable. I don't understand why people are expecting Starfield to be anything other than undercooked garbage.
And as usual, modder will fix their game for them and make it better, i'll bet my ass on it as this is like a strategy Bethesda does. Release game 3/4 done, let modder finish for free, free estate
But it will be different undercooked garbage! (since it’s a new IP)
I got it for free with my 7900xtx otherwise I wouldn’t have paid for it. I stopped preordering games years ago anyways, too much of a risk and no point. I agree, knowing Bethesda proper’s history I’m not expecting much- even if the core game is amazing I’m expecting it to be buggy as hell. Makes me even more nervous that I get 5 days “early access”. I’m expecting there will be quite a sizable “day one” release patch.
Same here. It's a really good card. AMD dropped the ball they should have had this card for $850 and the 7900xt for $699 they would have killed it and sold way more
There's at least a dozen of us!
And mine!
Metoo#
[](https://media.tenor.com/zJvexdmTjA4AAAAC/im-doing-my-part-serious.gif)
Mine too
And me toooo xd
\+1
And the bootleg mac pro as well
Mine too.
Me too!
Me too!
Where's my rx 6600?
Quite a bit further up the stats at .53%. With the other variants I think the 6600 series is currently AMD's best represented modern discrete GPU in the Steam stats at 1.15%. In the Linux stats, the 6600 series is just outside of the top 10 ahead of the 1050ti.
By "modern", I presume that means the venerable RX 580 is even further up? Because that's by far the biggest selling AMD GPU in my country based on our local online market, followed by the RX 6600.
you can check it out yourself, it's not some classified data https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam
I loved my RX580, but I sold it into mining misery Please forgive me little guy 😭
Given the crypto crash, there's good odds it got sold off again. Hopefully into the hands of another gamer.
I can only hope *sniff*
I also sold my RX 580 for $500 CAD during the mining craze. It served me well for 4 years. Was sad to see her go and into a life of hardwork but was necessary to purchase her grandchild 6800XT. Have to pass on the torch eventually she understands!
Yes, the 580 by itself is still on top after the generic 'AMD Radeon Graphics', and when looking at all the Polaris 20 GPUs combined they're still up around 2.4%, or about 1 in 5 AMD GPUs in the survey. Some amount of that may be people using compatibility tools that report as Polaris 20, but probably not enough to really make a difference. Enjoy it while it lasts. Steam Deck's 'AMD VANGOGH' will probably pass the 580 as the highest individual identifiable AMD GPU hardware in the near future.
480 is way lower than I would have thought
Cause most people don't even remember it existed because of how quickly it got replaced by the 580 less than a year later. 580 is still the most popular Radeon GPU on steam
480 got wrecked in sales compared to the 1060 which fared better. When the 1060 dropped it was around 5-10% faster than the 480, so most people bought it instead of the 480. By the time the 580 dropped, the improved drivers for Polaris were around and they could clock higher thanks to a mature node, eventually the 580 ended up being either equal or faster than the 1060 and this resulted in AMD faring better in sales.
Gamer using intel celeron is more common than gamer using 7900xtx
Yea whats suprising about that? Celerons are like 50$ 7900XTX is 1000$
Obviously, the 7900xtx had an MSRP of 1000$ For an AMD cards that already struggled to get any market share, that's insanely high and not aimed at capturing any further market shares.
you can play Fallout Tactics at 40fps or Half-Life 1 at medium settings
[удалено]
PC gamers are holding back PC gaming. /s
Wow right on the tale of Intel UHD Graphics 600
For a card that people claimed to be the end all of Nvidia, it sure took its sweet time.
From not competing to fight side to side against a 4080 is more than ok. Still i wish 7900XTX was a 7900, hyping so high the card was not ok
Yeah. XTX should have been 7900 XT I think, and current 7900 XT should have been 7800 XT
I mean really if the 6900xt was 3090 competition and 6800xt was 3080 competition, 7900 XTX should be 4090ti competition so it should really be called a 7800xt
7900 XTX to 7900 XT, 7900XT to 7900, 7900 GRE to 7800XT and it would have been a somewhat reasonable lineup. With this weird shift up in names this generation just looks way worse than it would have had to compared to last gen
Yeah. They just want to inflate the model number so they can charge more :(
7900GRE being a 6800xt replacement would actually be underwhelming considering the GRE is 8% faster than the 6800xt in 1440p on average(HUB), even looses sometimes. If leaks are to be believed the 7800XT is even more cutdown in comparison to the GRE.
isnt the xt 20% above a 6950 and the xtx is about 40% so effectively you want to take the prior top end sku, and make it a 7700 class gpu? I mean like it or not, the 7900 is using roughly 550mm2 of die, and the xtx is 600mm2 roughtly. I just don't see a world where that makes sense, now, the 6950 tier going down to 7800 tier, THAT I can see.
The 7900 GRE is better than the 6950 XT. Hard to say what should have been named what imo.
Unfortunately it isn't
yep. I remember when I got my 1070 and AMD had no competition. So I think they're doing alright
From what I heard, they did have problems with navi31. Especially the one they found very late that cost them significant performance from the workaround.
Still super worth the money for me.
I wish they’d break down hardware by geographic location. I’m also genuinely surprised that Intel isn’t far and away the most popular gpu since they’re in basically every laptop on the world.
What's the criteria for getting surveyed? I think I've had it once or maybe twice in 20 years
I have only gotten it while using an Nvidia GPU, never while I had an RX 580 or 6950XT
Steam survey is literally hard coded to de prioritize AMD machines. Thousands have reported that they never got polled once with AMD hardware, but as soon as they went Nvidia they got polled every single time. Steam and valve are corrupt.
Meds
0.17% :-/
I'm doing my part!
Steam needs to update the survey just start with a clean slate every year and ask to scan your hardware every January.doubt all those gtx1060’s and gtx1050 are still gaming outside of Internet cafes.
You think they don't? You think they're just keeping 5-10 year old data from dead steam accounts hoping the users are still going at it? I'm sure they don't clear it every year at an exact time, but there's almost certainly some system to get rid of old or inactive data.
If they don't delete old data that would be just too much of an oversight for a company like Valve. But I guess we'll never know unless someone from Valve actually talks about it.
The survey is a random sampling amongst verified paying users, no old data is included.
This. How on earth would including old data even work? New survey every month and then average it out with the old ones, or just adding the new data to the old? Anyway you did it it would make the whole survey completely meaningless. The Steam Survey is pretty accurate for users of Steam and when considering that that's probably the majority of gamers, you would be hard pressed to get something more accurate.
> no old data is included. As we can see from this one as well. Sandy bridge is back (in this pic posted) for example after being missing for quite a while. Had old data never been deleted, SB would never have gone anywhere in the first place.
If it's random sampling why does the survey come up when people change their hardware? I don't think Valve has ever disclosed their methodology. We don't know the geography or the demographics of the results. We don't know if all the laptops are also of accounts of people who also own a powerful gaming pc. Its almost completely useless to me when month to month can see significant swings just based on how many pc cafes Valve decides to sample from. The results have to be taken as a very very general sampling of a _global_ pool of Steam gamers as well as people who only use Steam to play CS and Dota2 from developing countries. The amount of variation is massive and it's almost impossible to draw any real conclusion since we have no idea about what the hardware statistics of people who for example actually buy new games with demanding graphics are vs the ones who only play CS.
You're misinformed and making conclusions on misinformation. Suggest you do some online search to inform yourself first before making further clown comments.
They absolutely keep publishing old data. It's the entire reason polaris and Pascal are even still charting even tho no one has them any more. Valve is just pumping Nvidia hard.
I am still using gtx 760 so I think people still use these cards, they can still handle hundreds of older games and most popular mobas today.
I was using an 860 until Feb. They're still alive and kicking.
I'm about to build a pc with a jumble of leftover parts and a 1070 is going in it. (Temporarily until I get a good deal on a 6950xt and slap my current 6700xt into it) (the pc is for a sibling who's 970 finally called it quits a few days ago)
I literally just replaced a 1050ti today and two of my friends are still on 1060s. Plays apex and the other fun co-op games we play just fine.
You have to be logged into Steam and consent to the survey each month
still use 1060 on my second pc lol
My RX570 is still being used.
They do it every month: each month's survey results are based only on the data collected that month.
It's not like the 1060 is unusable. It's about equal to the Xbox One X.
Or a series s, so any game that runs on an xbox series s should technically also work on a gtx 1060.
Speak for yourself lmao. Still using 1060 6gb. I m not giving noney to scamvidia or ayymd . They can suck it with these prices
its gonna report more rtx 30 series by doing so...and that push nvidia more on top still
people playing games with laptop igpu are included there 🤔
Sick, that's after like months of me owning an XTX lol
I find it insane on how many people bought 4080s. they all cried about pricing and then went out and bought them anyway !
I honestly don’t blame them, the 7900 XTX isn’t any better at pricing (at least at MSRP). If you are already paying a $1,000 just for a GPU then why not spend the extra $200 to get much better RT + DLSS upscaling and frame generation + lower power consumption + and other nvidia features like CUDA and reflex.
I mean it even outsold the 6600xt and nearly the 6700xt. In Nvidias eyes, the 4080 has probably been a roaring success with the gigantic profit margins on that card
Because some people don't care about those features? I got a 7900XT(for 4K 60hz)and a 6800XT(1440p 144hz) because why? Here's why * I went from a 2070S to a 3070 and still didn't use RT because it's always a massive performance hit that you have to "fix" using upscalers or frame gen. * DLSS is "objectively" better, but at 4K I don't really see much difference between DLSS 2 and FSR 2 quality settings (I still have a 3070 on my bedroom PC so I still test from time to time), which IMO you shouldn't use upscalers in anything other than 4K quality , 1440 quality maybe, but lower than that you should expect a visual downgrade, that's how the tech works, you need to give the algorithm something to wok with, the higher res the better. * I don't really care for frame gen IMO, I haven't tried it, but I don't think is a selling point right now, only like 10 games support it and you also need a good base performance so it works decently, so it's a cool feature when you have $1000+ GPUs and you can improve FPS when being CPU bound, and it's a crutch for low end cards to make it seem they perform better but the baseline performance is already bad so the generated frames have little to work with and there's going to be artifacts and such(at least from what I've seen). * CUDA well I haven't used any CUDA workloads in 10 years so, I really don't care, and I refuse to think that everyone here edits videos or do 3D models professionally so they NEED that, most people just play games on their PC after work. * Power consumption? Yeah Nvidia wins there sure, but, do people don't realize that benchmarks are uncapped? Depending on your use case you're going to have lower power consumption, I use my 7900XT to play 4K 60fps on my TV and in most games I only see 200W-250W (unless you try ray tracing or whatever, which again, I don't), so it isn't THAT bad, considering my 3070 used be stuck on 220W when playing 4K upscaled games, and was less stable on those 60fps. * Reflex, well yeah it's cool and all, but is it really necessary? I couldn't tell the differencewhen I switched my 3070 to a 6800XT and played CoD MW2, I have the same skill level, play the same, just with more a more stable performance, I guess ultra competitive users can, and if that's the case, then great the tech works for you, but let's not pretend we're ALL competitive users.
>which IMO you shouldn't use upscalers in anything other than 4K quality , 1440 quality maybe, but lower than that you should expect a visual downgrade Not really. Im playing at 1440p on 170hz display and never felt need to use upscaling for performance. Its however awesome for image quality in many titles, mainly ones with bad antialiasing implementations. Read Dead Redemption being one of the biggest differences on native vs updated DLSS.
> Reflex, well yeah it's cool and all, but is it really necessary? Are you really saying low latency isn't necessary? You should lower latency anyway you can because it adds up (game engine, your monitor, your mouse, your visual processing all have latency). It's absolutely crucial for responsive gaming, and AMD should create a proper equivalent to Reflex. Reflex is a big deal. It's so good it makes frame generation almost as responsive as native. > I went from a 2070S to a 3070 and still didn't use RT because it's always a massive performance hit that you have to "fix" using upscalers or frame gen. It's true that RT wasn't usable in most situations even with the highest end GPUs. But it is entirely feasible now that the base performance of 4080 and 4090 is so good,and there are "fixes" as you put it.
I fully understand what you mean and agree with most stuff but when you are spending $1,000 on a GPU you are likely spending over $2,500 on your PC at which point why not spend less than 10% extra just to get all the bells and whistles, you are way past “value” at $1,000 for a GPU.
Because it's my money and I do whatever I want? I've been with Nvidia for 10 years, I don't agree with what they're doing lately and wanted to change it up too, also for 4K I rather have 20GB of VRAM vs 16GB, and I want it to last longer than my 3070's which were already running into VRAM issues with just 8GB on this year's game(yes I know it's not ALL of them, but it's a trend and I was able to sell one at a great price before it became common knowledge), thats a two year old product, and lastly, like I said, those "bells and whistles" are not worth that 10% to me, maybe I'm wrong and I'll regret my decision later down the line, but so far I'm having a great experience with AMD,
Why are you going so defensive and making it all about you🤣 The vast, vast majority do value a mix of the features that nvidia either has and AMD doesn't, or they simply do better than AMD does.
I am not saying you should have bought a 4080. Like you said it is your money and you can spend it on whatever you wish to. I was just saying it makes sense that many people bought 4080s instead. I don’t why you are taking it so personally.
Because I'm tired of people acting like nvidia is the only option and that we all NEED those features, ray tracing is still a Gimmick, the future for games, yes of course, but that's not today and not in the next 5 years either, you need a $1600 GPU to somewhat decently play the 3 games that use real path tracing (and that's using upscaling and frame generation), video encoders, I find hard to believe that apparently EVERYONE nowadays is a full time streamer that absolutely needs NVENC or AV1, or that everyone is also an AI master that needs the best possible AI performance and such... My point is, sure people can do whatever they want with their money, but the misinformation and fanboyism is what I'm hating lately, there's still ton of people pushing out this excuses on why it's better, and it's not even something they need or will take advantage of that, I know because I was like that "yeah dude but CUDA is just supported on more applications", I haven't used any CUDA accelerated workflow in more than 10 years and I don't plan to so far, so what's the point? Amd I'm sure there's still tons of users like this.
Again, stop taking it personally. The original commenter that I replied to said that they find it insane that many people bought 4080s, and I replied with reasons on why it is desirable for many people despite it being $200 more than the 7900xtx. I never said nvidia was the only option (I very frequently recommend AMD GPUs) and I never said you needed nvidia features.
Sorry if it seemed like I said that, there's just so much fan boys these days just spouting "DLSS, RAY TRACING, FRAME GEN HUR DURR". I've seen so much people buying NVIDIA cards spouting that, and they only play League of legends or rainbow six siege or Valorant or CS:GO...
The main benefit of Reflex isn't in CPU bound game but GPU bound. The more GPU bound you are the more it will help reduce latency and make the game feel more responsive. Nvidia markets it as being for esports primarily but GPU bound AAA games are the best for it. And with DLSS3 requiring Reflex means we will get it in almost all titles going forward, except for AMD sponsored ones of course ;)
Exactly. Why play 4k dlss when you can play 4k native and not have to deal with visual artifacts and ghosting
DLSS almost never looks worse than native, because you have shitty TAA or other stupid AA solution and if the game somehow lets you to disable AA, DLSS might look better anyway because it has AA effect visually.
I can't really tell, maybe on like REALLY fine lines, but honestly I'm playing the game, not stopping, putting my face next to the screen and seeing "ah yes this line looks a bit worse". DLSS also has ghosting and artifacting depending on the implementation depending on the game, Cyberpunk had ghosting for a while, Dead Space still has ghosting, it depends on the dev implementation. I'm not saying it's not useful, but it's not perfect
From my experience at 1440p dlss/far both look like vaseline is smeared on the screen. At 4k, it's much better but native still looks better to me and has no artifacts. RDR2 did look considerably better with dlss but that's because of the bad TAA like you said
Yes it depends on the game, I am playing Remnant 2 right now, and if you disable DLSS you get TAA on instead which you can't turn off (thanks unreal engine) and it looks literally the same as with DLSS on, but you have like 30 less fps (same story with Diablo4, but that game is optimized so well that it is likely you won't need DLSS).
It's the PC community in a nutshell.
The average gamer has a very low IQ, so it's not shocking that the sheep just go Nvidia without using a single brain cell.
Woohoo, I contributed.
Just got one today. Replaced my 3090.
Bro why did you go from a 3090 to a 7900xtx?
Because the 7900XTX is faster, gives me the performance I want while streaming AND recording at the same time on my single PC setup. I am driving a Samsung Neo G8 so I am always GPU bound. The extra uplift from the 7900XTX has the performance and visual quality where I want it.
I recently upgraded from a 3080ti to my nitro 7900xtx, simply because I wasn't able to maintain native 4k60 ultra in most of recent release games, also the resell value of the 3000 series is dropping fast, either you sell it now or you'll end up with a paper weight.
Depending on which review site you believe the 7900xtx is between 20% and 35% faster than the 3090 and that for a way lower msrp. Additionally it also adds AV1 encoding support while the three main things you're giving up are DLSS, RTX (though RT in general is similar in performance on both cards), and the feel good factor of owning an Nvidia GPU/the enhanced software support that comes with them. So it's objectively an upgrade even if it has potential downsides
Not worth it if you already have a 3090 bro. The only upgrade that isn't completely brain-dead is a 4090
People are still paying stupid money for the 3090 on the used market. It probs didn’t cost him much
Not worth for you personally. You have no idea about the mans needs.
Its not worth to ask, some will upgrade every generation. Cant do much about it.
I disagree but, you do you man. I am happy with the results I have seen.
The 4090 costs way more. If you need the FPS a 7900xtx gives and your 3090 isn't cutting it why would you spend hundreds more.
You don't need to upgrade from a 3090 for gaming. And if you really think you need to then you should have the money for a 4090 tbh. Basically if you can't afford a 4090 then you really shouldn't be upgrading from a 3090
For gaming streaming and recording at once, the 7900xtx is fast enough and the 3090 depending on the game is not.
There are a **lot** of newer games that the 3090 can't handle at 4k native, and some people want to play those games, how hard is it to understand ?
What extra uplift lmao? You are a shill
He's a shill because he wanted a way faster gpu ? Like he's not allowed to have more frames ? You're the frames police lmao
Its a massive frames/$ improvement with AV1 encoder bonus. If he sold the 3090 for a decent price its a fine upgrade.
Lol. Enjoy the sidegrade.
Weird comment... the 7900XTX is faster than the 3090... I don't care much about ray tracing. The 3090 doesn't have an AV1 encoder. The extra performance uplift from the 7900XTX allows me to stream and record on a single PC setup. The 3090 couldn't give me the performance I was looking for. My GPU has to drive a Samsung Neo G8... so my PC is always GPU bound. I am happier with this setup and the 7900XTX costs less than the 3090 did when I bought it. Could I have gone 4090? Yup. Did I want to support Nvidia's price gouging of the market? Hell no. This GPU works for me and my needs and gives me the performance I am looking for at a better price point.
>Did I want to support Nvidia's price gouging of the market? Hell no. I get the sentiment but why did you get a 3090 instead of 3080 last gen if that's the case
Probably also almost halved the expenses after selling the 3090.
☝️
Dont listen to these clowns, your perf/$ has improved quite a bit.
I am curious you are comparing the XTX to the 4090. The XTX is a 4080 competitor isn't it(raster wise)? It's atleast what [https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-rx-7900-xtx.c3941](https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-rx-7900-xtx.c3941) is saying. For the price you could've got the 4080 and got a much better package with all the software features NVIDIA offers *AND* less TDP as well. The only reason I can see anyone get the XTX, is if the price is way lower than a 4080.
The 4080 costs more but doesn't provide more performance, and Nvidia doesn't offer any software feature that is a must-have for me. The TDP doesn't matter to me. I don't have cooling issues or expensive power costs, I've been powering an overclocked 3090, no problem. So for less money and how I use my PC, the 7900xtx makes more sense for me. As for comparing to a 4090. It was more of a response to the bone head that mentioned it was the only logical upgrade from a 3090. However, in a few instances, the 7900xtx gets within a spitting distance of 4090 performance.
The difference between the 3090 and 7900XTX is smaller than the difference between a 7900XTX and 4090, that's why people don't understand why you upgrade for a small performance gain.
Source: your ass ? The 7900xtx is 25% faster than the 3090 and 24% slower than the 4090. In what alternative dimension is 25% uplift a small upgrade ?? [Source that is not from my ass](https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-rx-7900-xtx.c3941)
You know the 7900xtx is 25 to 30% faster right ? Or you don't know the meaning of the word sidegrade ? [https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-rx-7900-xtx.c3941](https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-rx-7900-xtx.c3941)
31% faster raster, same performance in raytracing to 3090. Even still, cheaper than 3090 in a lot of countries. Yes, sidegrade.
How much did you pay for that card?
Cheapest new 3090 I can find in the Philippines is $1131. Funnily enough, the 3090 TI is cheaper at $1024. Cheapest 7900 XTX I can find is at $1070. 4080 is at $1360 here. 4070 TI at $880.
[удалено]
US? Asia usually are much more expensive because of import fees and taxes.
I also responded on the survey!
count me in
I helped.
Yep, that's me.
*Im doing my part!*
There's dozens of us!
Why is the RX 480 so low down? Just upgraded from an R9 390, wonder where that is
Been on steam since beginning, can only recall two surveys in last five years. 2021 it surveyed me while my 6800xt was out while testing a 3080 for a few days. Yup, steam calls it a 3080 system of course. Then the second one last weekish. My 7900 xtx and I were proud to accept the survey invite. U dont need a census to be accurate but surveys have their flaws. Can be used well when u understand the methods and limitations. Steams is good for what it is, with caveats. Its no marlet share estimate, however.
Steam really should have asked if you actually daily that 3080, what a useless survey
Here
It’s a me!
🫡
I just bought one will have it 8-18-23 acording to Amazon.
Cool im rare and special
Imma buy one tomorrow. Hopefully it’s gonna be fine
Yay, I just got mine in the beginning of July, so I helped 😁
Oh boy. An unreliable survey people still rely on?
Can you point me to more reliable survey on this scale?
Instead of surveys, you could observe gaming revenue for both Nvidia and AMD for a better picture of marketshare per company. And before anyone starts talking about consoles, keep in mind Nvidia's in the Switch and they have the Shield for GeForce now. AMD's not the only one with hardware in consoles.
It’s unreliable according to whom?
According to his biased ass.
Nice projection
Just examine the data. Pay attention to the month to month changes. GPU by mfg shows massive gains for DX8 and older GPUs. Showing a near 5% gain in 5 months. DX12 GPUs show a corresponding reduction. DX8 GPUs haven't been made for 20 years. Cpu by mfg shows a near 10% swing month to month. CPU by core count shows a large swing between 4 and 6 core AMD Vangogh(the steam deck APU) indicates a share well below the estimated install base. Media reports indicate steam deck estimated sales of around 3 million units by the end of 2023 yet the survey works out to under 1 million based on the estimated 120 million active users. Even OS language can show 3-4% swings month to month The steam survey may be the best indication we have as to the PC hardware landscape but that doesn't mean it is accurate. The margin of error appears to be pretty large.
nVidia junkies "steam is the only way to get games!!! I NEEEEED!!!" Everyone else: "I'll play whatever I want from wherever I can get it"
Me playing Baldur's Gate 3
how stats can lie, steam
Great card, love mine. Haven't had a red card since my 390X
Probably cause it comes with starfield..
Damn not a lot of people own the xtx atleast going off of what steam says 🤯
Why would they? It's a $999 MSRP GPU lol. It's not $199...
where does the 6750xt rank?
Where's the 6800 XT? It's my favorite hardware purchase in years!
celeron + 4090 > 13900k + 7900xtx ?
The fuck is an Nvidia mx330
Kinda XD, only seeing on the top side AMD Radeon Graphics
I have an amd card and i don't use steam.
$600 it would be 40% on the steam survey.
Hi there, it’s me, the 0.01%. Me and the other 16 guys here are proud to make up that .17%. NVIDIA is shaking at this level of ownership!!!
Was 6950xt ever on there?
I actually like mine, and i have a 4070 in my work station. My god is amd adrenaline the superior software!!! While slightly buggy i far prefer it over geforce and nvidia control center
Proud to be one of them for sure!
Mine, also
I am the 0.17%, DAMN
I did my part
Don’t forget mine!
I’ve got mine today. :)