AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT Linux Performance

[zaps166]

How about idle power consumption with single 4k 60Hz monitor connected? I read that RDNA3 has higher idle power consumption than RDNA2.

[Danny3]

Awful prices for crappy performance!
At this point, I think it's just better to wait for the newer generation.
At least that one will hopefully have real performance and power efficiency improvements!

[gentoofu]

The seemingly lazy engineering by board partners drives me nuts. Why the hell does this card with a 190W TBP and a peak of 165W in these tests need two 8 pins for power? That's 375W of potential for a card that can easily get by on a single 8 pin. Even i f they want to assume 0W from the PCIe slot from some crap out of spec motherboard, one 8 pin + one 6 pin would be more than enough. And it's not just power delivery. Even most midrange cards are > 2.0 slots these days. And even for the ones that are actually 2 slots wide, they have these ridiculous cooler designs that stick up way above the slot height and won't fit under cooling shrouds in some cases.

Unless you need the AV1 encoder, you'd be better off with a 6700 XT for the exact same $329. It's faster. It uses an x16 interface vs x8. And it's got way more memory bandwidth (192 wide vs 128). Get 'em before they are gone.

DisplayPort 2.1 is hard requirement for these cards. 7600 non-XT only requires 1.4. So, that also might have something to do with requiring 8-pin vs 6.

[Panix]

As long as enough people pay those high prices we will never get back to old prices. Even worse is that the used market also raised it's prices, still cheaper than new but not exactly cheap.

True but buying used - I would argue has no impact or little impact on what nvidia or amd does with their gpu prices - unless the seller turns around and puts that money towards a new gpu purchase.

I buy used when I can if I can trust a seller and hopefully, get the same gpu I would have at the store for a lot less and I tend to look at doing it especially when the prices are way overinflated - um....like they've been for the last several years. I did buy one retail/new gpu for a PC build but that was only semi-recently.

I do worry about warranty and condition of the card, though. But, yes, ppl should try to unite in waiting as long as possible - these gpus are overly expensive with inflated prices - and they will keep these pricing policies as long as ppl buy the cards in droves.

[Panix]

How about idle power consumption with single 4k 60Hz monitor connected? I read that RDNA3 has higher idle power consumption than RDNA2.

Total power consumption is lower for RDNA 3 vs RDNA 2 but yes, there was some peculiar idle power problem with RDNA 3 cards and also a problem when using multiple displays - I forget if it was just for 2 or more than 2 - and whether this was ever 'fixed' or solved - it sounds like it's still occurring - it might not be a driver problem but something to do with the architecture - it depends on how you ask - but, it's very worrisome to hear - although, I don't plan on using more than one display - it's still bad to have some architecture defect or design flaw in your potentially super expensive graphics card.

The other aspect of this idle power problem is the refresh rates of the display - when they vary - anyway, someone here is bound to know more or explain it better - but, it is problematic, that's all I know.

[Panix]

Depressing release. I fail to see that AMD is really trying to evolve (or compete) with this card, having almost the same perf of RX6600 XT.

AMD and Nvidia are doing the same thing - I know ppl scoff at the accusation that they're colluding here - but, hey, it sure looks like it.

The 4060 is crap and Nvidia gimps and cripples cards - released cards with low amounts of vram and charges a fortunate for them - they do this so you have no choice but to look at the higher tiers - to force you to go to the flagship cards - to the xx80 and xx90 cards.

AMD is copying this philosophy except they're generous to slap more vram to the mid-tier and upper tier cards - but, they still gimp the cards as you can see - the 'improvement/boost/progress' whatever you want to call it is modest at best - well, maybe there's a slight power efficiency improvement and that's pretty good for AMD.

[sophisticles]

I can't bring myself to spend $329 die gaming video card, when you can buy a PS4 for $200 and spend the other $130 on a low end Intel Arc card that is great for video.

Unfortunately there are plenty of people that will spend of money to play some game and so these pricing strategies will continue.

[sophisticles]

The seemingly lazy engineering by board partners drives me nuts. Why the hell does this card with a 190W TBP and a peak of 165W in these tests need two 8 pins for power? That's 375W of potential for a card that can easily get by on a single 8 pin. Even i f they want to assume 0W from the PCIe slot from some crap out of spec motherboard, one 8 pin + one 6 pin would be more than enough. And it's not just power delivery. Even most midrange cards are > 2.0 slots these days. And even for the ones that are actually 2 slots wide, they have these ridiculous cooler designs that stick up way above the slot height and won't fit under cooling shrouds in some cases.

Unless you need the AV1 encoder, you'd be better off with a 6700 XT for the exact same $329. It's faster. It uses an x16 interface vs x8. And it's got way more memory bandwidth (192 wide vs 128). Get 'em before they are gone.

Taking it one step further, if you need hardware AV1 encoder, AMD is not where you should be looking.

[agd5f]

Total power consumption is lower for RDNA 3 vs RDNA 2 but yes, there was some peculiar idle power problem with RDNA 3 cards and also a problem when using multiple displays - I forget if it was just for 2 or more than 2 - and whether this was ever 'fixed' or solved - it sounds like it's still occurring - it might not be a driver problem but something to do with the architecture - it depends on how you ask - but, it's very worrisome to hear - although, I don't plan on using more than one display - it's still bad to have some architecture defect or design flaw in your potentially super expensive graphics card.

The other aspect of this idle power problem is the refresh rates of the display - when they vary - anyway, someone here is bound to know more or explain it better - but, it is problematic, that's all I know.

The memory clock can only be updated during display blanking periods, otherwise, you see flickering on the displays. The challenge is that with multiple displays, it's hard to get the blanking periods to align, and additionally, on some displays the blanking periods are just too short to allow memory to reclock without flickering. It really comes down to the number of monitors that you are using and the timing on those monitors.

[Melcar]

Really hard to get excited about graphics cards these days. If you spend most of your time playing "AAA" games with fancy graphics then you really need one of those $400+ cards at least if you want to enjoy the game in its visual splendor and with decent speed. I'm talking about medium to high settings, +1440p, +60fps. Unless you are fine with frame generation and upscaling. For the rest of games, you can make due with a much slower card (but still better than integrated graphics), and at this level paying $300+ for a GPU seems really unappetizing.