AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT and RX 5700 Review Roundup

Bankie said:
What a troll. None of what you've said is correct in any way except for Navi maybe getting faster over time. It took AMD's 7nm process just to nip at NV's heels on 14nm. Once NV moves to their new process it's likely going to be a slaughter.

The Super cards are faster than their Navi counterparts and it pans out the same way in EVERY review. Here are some of TPU's charts. I didn't include the 4k chart as the current Navi cards are even further behind their competition.

View attachment 172884

0fkjE5t
Click to expand...

2070 Super is $500 the 5700XT competes with the 2060 super
 
Design1stcode2nd said:
2070 Super is $500 the 5700XT competes with the 2060 super
Click to expand...

Exactly. $500 is 25% more than $400. You aren't getting 25% more performance with the 2070 Super. Seems like in the 10 to 15% range at best. At $400, the 5700XT is the best performing card from what I've seen.
 
kirbyrj said:
Exactly. $500 is 25% more than $400. You aren't getting 25% more performance with the 2070 Super. Seems like in the 10 to 15% range at best. At $400, the 5700XT is the best performing card from what I've seen.
Click to expand...

If my 1080 died today I would replace it with a 5700xt as it's the best replacement for the dollar.
 
AMF & VCE on NAVI: Quality Analysis vs NVENC, X264 & RX 580! RX 5700 & RX 5700XT H.264 Encoder

 
The fanboy back and forth is Amusing...I have an OC'd RAdeon VII on water, another one with an unopened EK block sitting here, and I still purchased an XT 50th AV edition, just so I could....



PUT IT UNDER WATER COOLING! :D:D:D:D

I might be wrong but I expect the cherry picked 50th AV to go from competing with VII to outright beating it. Expecting it to clock to 2.1Ghz or so, depending on how locked down AMD keeps voltage and PL. If it isn't faster, then I will sell it. If it is it, I will sell it. I am using 1440P 120hz FreeSync'd via a 65" Samsung 8K series TV, and will not be moving to 4K gaming for a few years, considering we do not have any large format 4k displays that can do over 120hz and the GPUs to push those.
 
ccityinstaller said:
The fanboy back and forth is Amusing...I have an OC'd RAdeon VII on water, another one with an unopened EK block sitting here, and I still purchased an XT 50th AV edition, just so I could....



PUT IT UNDER WATER COOLING! :D:D:D:D

I might be wrong but I expect the cherry picked 50th AV to go from competing with VII to outright beating it. Expecting it to clock to 2.1Ghz or so, depending on how locked down AMD keeps voltage and PL. If it isn't faster, then I will sell it. If it is it, I will sell it. I am using 1440P 120hz FreeSync'd via a 65" Samsung 8K series TV, and will not be moving to 4K gaming for a few years, considering we do not have any large format 4k displays that can do over 120hz and the GPUs to push those.
Click to expand...

Looking forward to your results!
 
This GN review shows how bad the blowers are. Also, the power usage is pretty high and is higher than the 2070 super, a 14 or 16nm GPU. They also did a +50% power target setting on the 5700XT, and it shot past even a 2080Ti Ultra in power drain, for what was about 3% performance increase.

(Jump to 22:00)


Maaybe it is the horrible cooling that kept the 50% power from adding any more performance. But the fact that at a 7nm process it is pulling this much juice to be able to match the nVidia GPU built on 14 or 16nm, leaves me thinking that these are the top end of this part, and AMD has pushed them to within 3% of it's max performance to get the performance we are seeing.

Find the price competitive nVidia card, and it will easily software overclock. And any lead the navi part hard will disappear...

I mean, it is an improvement over Vega, but not enough of an improvement. Why have AMD's GPU's just been behind for so long? Seems that they are not spending the same investment in R&D...
 
GoodBoy said:
This GN review shows how bad the blowers are. Also, the power usage is pretty high and is higher than the 2070 super, a 14 or 16nm GPU. They also did a +50% power target setting on the 5700XT, and it shot past even a 2080Ti Ultra in power drain, for what was about 3% performance increase.

(Jump to 22:00)


Maaybe it is the horrible cooling that kept the 50% power from adding any more performance. But the fact that at a 7nm process it is pulling this much juice to be able to match the nVidia GPU built on 14 or 16nm, leaves me thinking that these are the top end of this part, and AMD has pushed them to within 3% of it's max performance to get the performance we are seeing.

Find the price competitive nVidia card, and it will easily software overclock. And any lead the navi part hard will disappear...

I mean, it is an improvement over Vega, but not enough of an improvement. Why have AMD's GPU's just been behind for so long? Seems that they are not spending the same investment in R&D...
Click to expand...


Are you forgetting that AMD is fighting a two front war, and many of us didn't give them a dime during the 'cobstruction core era?

AMD is stomping all over Intel in EVERYTHING except the .00005% of people that have a 9900k @ 5+Ghz and only play a few games.


This is a company beating a company that has over 15x their R&D budget!


On the other front, they are competing and trading blows/competing with Nvidia, again a company with well over 2-3X the R&D budget.


Thst is simply amazing in the tech world. AMD has gone from the true brink of becoming another VIA, to punching well above their weight given their Revenue and R&D expenditures.


Think about it that for a second.
 
Some of you guys are so anti consumer it isn't funny. I would love to see 50-100% improvements every 6 to 12 months like we did in the golden era (96-2011) but that isn't going to happen until we shift away from SI as a base material.
 
GoodBoy said:
This GN review shows how bad the blowers are. Also, the power usage is pretty high and is higher than the 2070 super, a 14 or 16nm GPU. They also did a +50% power target setting on the 5700XT, and it shot past even a 2080Ti Ultra in power drain, for what was about 3% performance increase.

(Jump to 22:00)


Maaybe it is the horrible cooling that kept the 50% power from adding any more performance. But the fact that at a 7nm process it is pulling this much juice to be able to match the nVidia GPU built on 14 or 16nm, leaves me thinking that these are the top end of this part, and AMD has pushed them to within 3% of it's max performance to get the performance we are seeing.

Find the price competitive nVidia card, and it will easily software overclock. And any lead the navi part hard will disappear...

I mean, it is an improvement over Vega, but not enough of an improvement. Why have AMD's GPU's just been behind for so long? Seems that they are not spending the same investment in R&D...
Click to expand...


Will be interesting to see how much the versions with better coolers are. For the RTX cards, you can get better cooler model for not that much more than the base models. If the AIBs add $40-50 premiums to the AMD cards the price advantage certainly won't be as good as initially thought.
 
Yeah, and $50 isn't all that much to me for better cooling. But that becomes a significant amount in the low and mid end price sectors. Not a big deal to me for a $700 card. but for a $350 card and someone on a budget, might change the equation.
 
GoodBoy said:
This GN review shows how bad the blowers are. Also, the power usage is pretty high and is higher than the 2070 super, a 14 or 16nm GPU. They also did a +50% power target setting on the 5700XT, and it shot past even a 2080Ti Ultra in power drain, for what was about 3% performance increase.

(Jump to 22:00)


Maaybe it is the horrible cooling that kept the 50% power from adding any more performance. But the fact that at a 7nm process it is pulling this much juice to be able to match the nVidia GPU built on 14 or 16nm, leaves me thinking that these are the top end of this part, and AMD has pushed them to within 3% of it's max performance to get the performance we are seeing.

Find the price competitive nVidia card, and it will easily software overclock. And any lead the navi part hard will disappear...

I mean, it is an improvement over Vega, but not enough of an improvement. Why have AMD's GPU's just been behind for so long? Seems that they are not spending the same investment in R&D...
Click to expand...

GoodBoy said:
This GN review shows how bad the blowers are. Also, the power usage is pretty high and is higher than the 2070 super, a 14 or 16nm GPU. They also did a +50% power target setting on the 5700XT, and it shot past even a 2080Ti Ultra in power drain, for what was about 3% performance increase.

(Jump to 22:00)


Maaybe it is the horrible cooling that kept the 50% power from adding any more performance. But the fact that at a 7nm process it is pulling this much juice to be able to match the nVidia GPU built on 14 or 16nm, leaves me thinking that these are the top end of this part, and AMD has pushed them to within 3% of it's max performance to get the performance we are seeing.

Find the price competitive nVidia card, and it will easily software overclock. And any lead the navi part hard will disappear...

I mean, it is an improvement over Vega, but not enough of an improvement. Why have AMD's GPU's just been behind for so long? Seems that they are not spending the same investment in R&D...
Click to expand...


you're totally cherry picking, techspot shows 10 watts less than 2070 super. Techspot also shows within 4% of 2070 super performance when averaged. AMD has nearly achieved parity. in regards to efficiency (large part likely in thanks to 7nm)

Power1.png
 
Last edited:
The power drain itself isn't the issue, it is that it is on a 7nm process and what that implies. The power drain basically matches the nVidia cards, but those are built on a 12nm process. The +50% power test showed that it is very very unlikely that these cards have any headroom for overclocking, even when versions come out with much better cooling. The silicon is at its limits... LN2 wouldn't turn these into 2080ti killers.. (a 12nm GPU).
 
Last edited:
GoodBoy said:
The power drain itself isn't the issue, it is that it is on a 7nm process and what that implies. The power drain basically matches the nVidia cards, but those are built on a 16nm process. The +50% power test showed that it is very very unlikely that these cards have any headroom for overclocking, even when versions come out with much better cooling. The silicon is at its limits... LN2 wouldn't turn these into 2080ti killers.. a 16nm GPU.
Click to expand...

Turing is 12nm though...... the 5700 consumes 16 watts less than the 2060 and is consistently faster. Is turing more effecient? Maybe. Is it huge? No.

And the 50% power test shows nothing being that the stock cooler is already taxed.

More telling would be hardwareunboxed/techspot running the fan at 100% and the 5700xt maintaining 2+Ghz.
 
GoodBoy said:
This GN review shows how bad the blowers are. Also, the power usage is pretty high and is higher than the 2070 super, a 14 or 16nm GPU. They also did a +50% power target setting on the 5700XT, and it shot past even a 2080Ti Ultra in power drain, for what was about 3% performance increase.

(Jump to 22:00)


Maaybe it is the horrible cooling that kept the 50% power from adding any more performance. But the fact that at a 7nm process it is pulling this much juice to be able to match the nVidia GPU built on 14 or 16nm, leaves me thinking that these are the top end of this part, and AMD has pushed them to within 3% of it's max performance to get the performance we are seeing.

Find the price competitive nVidia card, and it will easily software overclock. And any lead the navi part hard will disappear...

I mean, it is an improvement over Vega, but not enough of an improvement. Why have AMD's GPU's just been behind for so long? Seems that they are not spending the same investment in R&D...
Click to expand...


I mean to me the fact that they are a 5700 SKU and not a 5800 or 5900 means they probably left room to grow.
 
GoodBoy said:
The power drain itself isn't the issue, it is that it is on a 7nm process and what that implies. The power drain basically matches the nVidia cards, but those are built on a 16nm process. The +50% power test showed that it is very very unlikely that these cards have any headroom for overclocking, even when versions come out with much better cooling. The silicon is at its limits... LN2 wouldn't turn these into 2080ti killers.. a 16nm GPU.
Click to expand...
I had a feeling this might be Fury all over again -- maxed out from the factory just to be able to keep up with the price/performance point established by NV, and nothing left in the tank.

The OC tests will be the real tests because NV always leave a nice healthy 20-45% of OC headroom. Wouldn't be surprised if a non-Super 2060 with a conservative OC beats 5700XT.

Who was the guy saying a 5700XT on water will "trade blows" with a freaking 2700 Super? He's locked himself in a bathroom somewhere.
 
GoodBoy said:
The power drain itself isn't the issue, it is that it is on a 7nm process and what that implies. The power drain basically matches the nVidia cards, but those are built on a 16nm process. The +50% power test showed that it is very very unlikely that these cards have any headroom for overclocking, even when versions come out with much better cooling. The silicon is at its limits... LN2 wouldn't turn these into 2080ti killers.. a 16nm GPU.
Click to expand...

Correct^
Navi's power usage isn't a concern and nearly 20+ reviews show how these cards will use up as much cooling as you can throw at it. (& self OC to thermal limit)

Nobody is going to put the Radeon Box down, (when having an equally prices Geforce RTX box in the other hand), because they notice that the RTX is on a bigger node process... are you really trying to peddle that past us? Or that a user would see the radeon box w/ "7nm process" and set the box down, because they don't want that..?

I can see you have not read any more reviews, because in many (once again) Navi is beating RTX in efficiencies. So.. double check yourself next time and look at other sites before using a single review as the basis for anything.


$349 AMD Radeon RX 5700
$399 AMD Radeon RX 5700x

The two best choice for mainstream 1440p gaming. Buy today and watch them tackle next-gen games with ease. RDNA is no joke. These cards are not going to get slower, but more optimized and catered too, over time. Navi's recommendation changes when Nvidia and AMD release their big guns in the next round. But for now.. I see Navi & RDNA as the Gamer's choice now & looking forward.

I am not peddling anything, and am willing to back my reasoning up. As I am a Gamer and I know what I want and what all my 40+ year old friends want... and what they can afford.. and what they can stomach... and what they will afford themselves...


I also plan to buy a PlayStation & Xbox on their first's days. Cuz I have never been an either-or... type of person. If I don't like it, it gets handed away or sold. My G-Syncs are being handed down soon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: noko
like this
odditory said:
I had a feeling this might be Fury all over again -- maxed out from the factory just to be able to keep up with the price/performance point established by NV, and nothing left in the tank.

The OC tests will be the real tests because NV always leave a nice healthy 20-45% of OC headroom. Wouldn't be surprised if a non-Super 2060 with a conservative OC beats 5700XT.

Who was the guy saying a 5700XT on water will "trade blows" with a freaking 2700 Super? He's locked himself in a bathroom somewhere.
Click to expand...


Considering the regular 5700xt is as fast as 2070+, and comes within single digits % of a VII, I'm willing to bet my 50th AV ED will do 2-.1Ghz on water.

We will find out as soon as my preordered EK block arrives. Can't wait to see who is correct.
 
ccityinstaller said:
Considering the regular 5700xt is as fast as 2070+, and comes within single digits % of a VII, I'm willing to bet my 50th AV ED will do 2-.1Ghz on water.

We will find out as soon as my preordered EK block arrives. Can't wait to see who is correct.
Click to expand...

Im gonna order a block for my 5700xt as well. I really like this card. It is so smooth in games, even feels smoother than my 2080ti which is stomps it in FPS. I cant explain that.
 
tangoseal said:
Im gonna order a block for my 5700xt as well. I really like this card. It is so smooth in games, even feels smoother than my 2080ti which is stomps it in FPS. I cant explain that.
Click to expand...

That is pretty sweet! Nvidia released that new frame time capture tool that compares frame times to FPS...I'd love to see you try it out since my card has not gotten here yet. AMD hasn't even shipped it yet, unless they did and I did not get a notification.
 
Bankie said:
What a troll. None of what you've said is correct in any way except for Navi maybe getting faster over time. It took AMD's 7nm process just to nip at NV's heels on 14nm. Once NV moves to their new process it's likely going to be a slaughter.

The Super cards are faster than their Navi counterparts and it pans out the same way in EVERY review. Here are some of TPU's charts. I didn't include the 4k chart as the current Navi cards are even further behind their competition.

View attachment 172884

0fkjE5t
Click to expand...


I don't think you know how to read a chart or a graph.
Why are you calling people trolls and then post 2 charts showing AMD winning..? I already told you that NAVi is a win and it can be seen on 20+ reviews so far. You get angry at and post more of AMD win..?

I guess you can't even convince yourself, that navi sucks.
 
AMD has finally put out a competitive card at the same price point as Nvidia. The reason the Super's even exist at this time is likely due to that competition, even if you are a fan boy of Nvdia (which I can't understand being a brand fan boy) you should support AMD (as long as this is the price point/performance you are looking for of course) to continue that competition.

You can't moan about Nvidia jacking up prices and then go OHHH but RTX and buy Nvidia anyway. I don't 100% need to upgrade from my 4670k/1070 GTX but I want to and want to support healthy competition so it will be a Ryzen 3700 (maybe an X, depending on OC reviews) and a Radeon 5700XT (this is needed more at 3440x1440).
 
Design1stcode2nd said:
AMD has finally put out a competitive card at the same price point as Nvidia. The reason the Super's even exist at this time is likely due to that competition, even if you are a fan boy of Nvdia (which I can't understand being a brand fan boy) you should support AMD (as long as this is the price point/performance you are looking for of course) to continue that competition.

You can't moan about Nvidia jacking up prices and then go OHHH but RTX and buy Nvidia anyway. I don't 100% need to upgrade from my 4670k/1070 GTX but I want to and want to support healthy competition so it will be a Ryzen 3700 (maybe an X, depending on OC reviews) and a Radeon 5700XT (this is needed more at 3440x1440).
Click to expand...

As a consumer, I don't base my purchase decisions on supporting companies. That actually sounds a lot more like a fan boy activity to me.

If I were buying in this range today, at exactly these price points I would get:

at $350: The RX 5700 because regular RTX 2060 is weaker at RT, and only has 6GB(2GB deficit), and is further behind on traditional performance.
at $400: The RTX 2060 Super, because it is closer to 5700 XT in traditional performance(relative to the gap in the $350 cards), has more viable RT performance, and equal VRAM.
 
Just the shipping notice from AMD...My card won't be here until Monday of course. It's strange since they know offer a 2nd and next day shipment option but when I purchased on launch day the only option is premium ground...Same thing happened with my launch day VII.:(:(:(
 
Snowdog said:
As a consumer, I don't base my purchase decisions on supporting companies. That actually sounds a lot more like a fan boy activity to me.

If I were buying in this range today, at exactly these price points I would get:

at $350: The RX 5700 because regular RTX 2060 is weaker at RT, and only has 6GB(2GB deficit), and is further behind on traditional performance.
at $400: The RTX 2060 Super, because it is closer to 5700 XT in traditional performance(relative to the gap in the $350 cards), has more viable RT performance, and equal VRAM.
Click to expand...


That is a fairly rational line of thinking...I am locked into the FreeSnyc ecosystem, which means I have to stay AMD since Nvidia does not support FS via HDMI which is stupid AF....I spent $900 for a super fast gaming 65" TV, and losing adaptive sync is not an option. There is no going back once you have used it. Thanks to Samsung allowing 1080/1440P gaming @ true 120hz or 4K60hz I have plenty of options depending on the game.

Playing 6' from a 65" monitor is like being there. On VR really eclipses that, and until we get headsets and GPUs that can push 120~200FPS constant I will never be able to use VR due to motion sickness.
 
This card is absolutely great and definitely keep the room cooler than the Radeon VII. They really do need to get their asses in line and update the damn drivers. The bugs are killing me. I have to run my monitors both at 60hz and then set a custom gaming profile due to multimonitor power usage.
 
Gamer X said:
...Nobody is going to put the Radeon Box down, (when having an equally prices Geforce RTX box in the other hand), because they notice that the RTX is on a bigger node process... are you really trying to peddle that past us? Or that a user would see the radeon box w/ "7nm process" and set the box down, because they don't want that..?
Click to expand...

Obviously not, normal consumers don't care about node process. And I never sad anything to suggest a typical consumer would, so no idea why you are bringing this up.

Gamer X said:
I can see you have not read any more reviews, because in many (once again) Navi is beating RTX in efficiencies. So.. double check yourself next time and look at other sites before using a single review as the basis for anything.
Click to expand...

+ or - a few points, or beating particular card X is not the point, and isn't relevant. The fact is, Navi is a 7nm part that consumes approximately the same power as a 12nm part.

The primary reasons/benefits of doing a node shrink:
1) Decreased power drain for the same performance (as the prior process) [or] increased performance for the same power (as the prior process). Historically both were achieved, but no longer.
2) Smaller area = cheaper (since you get more chips per wafer, the overall per chip cost goes down)
3) Larger transistor count in the available area, allows for more complex and powerful chips.

I am focusing on the first reason. Since the power drain is basically the same as nVidia's 12nm GPU's, it means that they opted for "increased performance" at the same power level.
We can infer from this that at the lowered power level that is achievable with a die shrink, that the performance was too low to be competitive. So they had to boost the power.
It means the GPU's layout/design is not as good as their competitors. It also means that when the competitor drops to a 7nm process and gets all of those same advantages, that this part will be at an even larger deficit.

Maaybe better cooling will help Navi, remains to be seen. Someone said they got a water block on order, looking forward to those results. But that adds to the cost and changes its' place in the price/performance matchups... putting closer to or at the 2070 Supers' price. Is it going to make up enough performance? Hopefully he reports the results so we get an idea.

I suspect the silicon is already at it's limits, but with a shitty blower type cooler, it might be throttling, and maybe he can get more out of it. But judging from the past Radeons, including one that required factory water cooling, I am not holding my breath.

Gamer X said:
$349 AMD Radeon RX 5700
$399 AMD Radeon RX 5700x

The two best choice for mainstream 1440p gaming. Buy today and watch them tackle next-gen games with ease. RDNA is no joke. These cards are not going to get slower, but more optimized and catered too, over time. Navi's recommendation changes when Nvidia and AMD release their big guns in the next round. But for now.. I see Navi & RDNA as the Gamer's choice now & looking forward.

I am not peddling anything, and am willing to back my reasoning up...
Click to expand...

Now you just sound like a salesman and/or fanboy. Doesn't help your credibility.
 
Last edited:
sabrewolf732 said:
GoodBoy

turing is NOT 16nm

you've been corrected on this already, it's 12nm finfet
Click to expand...

But what they call 12nm FFN is really 16nm+. Actual transistor density is unchanged:

GP 102(16nm): (12.0 Billion transistors)/471mm2 = 25.5 Million transistors/mm2
TU 104(12nm FFN): (13.6 Billion transistors)/545mm2 = 25.0 Million transistors/mm2
 
Snowdog said:
As a consumer, I don't base my purchase decisions on supporting companies. That actually sounds a lot more like a fan boy activity to me.

If I were buying in this range today, at exactly these price points I would get:

at $350: The RX 5700 because regular RTX 2060 is weaker at RT, and only has 6GB(2GB deficit), and is further behind on traditional performance.
at $400: The RTX 2060 Super, because it is closer to 5700 XT in traditional performance(relative to the gap in the $350 cards), has more viable RT performance, and equal VRAM.
Click to expand...

At $400, I think the 5700XT is a better buy as it is more powerful and RT at that performance level is useless.

As an added bonus it is actually available now.
 
Snowdog said:
But what they call 12nm FFN is really 16nm+. Actual transistor density is unchanged:

GP 102(16nm): (12.0 Billion transistors)/471mm2 = 25.5 Million transistors/mm2
TU 104(12nm FFN): (13.6 Billion transistors)/545mm2 = 25.0 Million transistors/mm2
Click to expand...


I hear rumblings about AMD 7nm isn't really 7nm. Now that they are closer to parity.. All the sudden, 7nm is really 7nm and AMD uArch just sucks. Haha. Love it.
 
Using RTX features on a 2060 is a joke, it's barely functional on a 2070.

Q2-RTX-1440-1480x833.png
 
Nvidia Super card release backfired on them with the AMD price cut: Guess this is what happens when you do not sign a GPP with Nvidia. When I watched the Super videos, they all praised Nvidia like it was the second coming, at least those who clearly signed the GPP.
 
Snowdog said:
But what they call 12nm FFN is really 16nm+. Actual transistor density is unchanged:

GP 102(16nm): (12.0 Billion transistors)/471mm2 = 25.5 Million transistors/mm2
TU 104(12nm FFN): (13.6 Billion transistors)/545mm2 = 25.0 Million transistors/mm2
Click to expand...

Rvenger said:
I hear rumblings about AMD 7nm isn't really 7nm. Now that they are closer to parity.. All the sudden, 7nm is really 7nm and AMD uArch just sucks. Haha. Love it.
Click to expand...

If anyone is "spinning" the Xnm process node numbers, it would be the Fabs... Certainly not me, I have to take their word on what nm the process is... But the transistor density comparison is actually an easy way to tell.

So lets do that desnity calculation on the Navi GPU:
10.3 billion transistors/251mm² = 41.0 Million transistors/mm²

So clearly, it is a more dense process and if one is exaggerating, they both are and it cancels out. Point still stands, 7nm vs 12nm based on the ratio of transistors, is valid. So are my conclusions.
 
GoodBoy said:
If anyone is "spinning" the Xnm process node numbers, it would be the Fabs... Certainly not me, I have to take their word on what nm the process is... But the transistor density comparison is actually an easy way to tell.

So lets do that desnity calculation on the Navi GPU:
10.3 billion transistors/251mm² = 41.0 Million transistors/mm²

So clearly, it is a more dense process and if one is exaggerating, they both are and it cancels out. Point still stands, 7nm vs 12nm based on the ratio of transistors, is valid. So are my conclusions.
Click to expand...


You really should read why AMD architectures will likely always be hamstrung in comparison to Nvidia. Due to the consoles... let me see if I can find that link.


Here it is...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top