The Performance Uplift of RDNA 3 over RDNA 2...

Yes, this is an RDNA 2 card, I wasn't able to create a new one with RDNA 3 just yet...

Much was made about the performance uplift (or lack thereof) of the initial RDNA3 cards released by AMD. Navi 31 (the RX 7900 XTX and XT) failed to meet expectations - seemingly both internal to AMD and externally (for various reasons) - this lack of performance also extended to the RX 7900 GRE which, despite lower core clocks, still underperformed compared to where it could be calculated that it should be...

Disappointingly, Navi 33 (the RX 7600) performed exactly the same as the equivalent RDNA2 counterpart, the RX 6650 XT, showing that there was zero performance uplift gen-on-gen in that lower tier part...

In the meantime, rumours swirled that Navi 32 was going to be 'fixed'. So, what is the truth of the matter? I intend to investigate a little and get to the bottom of the situation like I did with my Ampere vs Ada Lovelace performance uplift analysis...

Alan Wake 2 Performance Analysis...

Alan Wake 2 is the new hotness in the games industry. Love it or hate it, you cannot deny the impact that it has had on the general conversation with regards to hardware, software, and game development. While I'm not as on-board with the near universal, unfettered praise for the title as most reviewers appear to be, I do find the discussions surrounding the hardware requirements and performance of that hardware near and dear to my heart.

So, without further ado, let's take a look at how current mid-range hardware performs in this game and whether that actually lines up with the hardware requirements that the developers put out just before the game's release...

In Defence Of: Older Hardware...

Via Twitter...

The release of the required PC hardware specifications of Alan Wake 2, along with the revelation that RX 5000 series and GTX 10 series cards would not be supported* caused quite a stir in various online fora. I, myself, have not been overly happy with them but it may not be for the typical reasons that proponents of advancing technology(!!) would like to paint. At the same time, despite the hyperbole on both sides of the equation, I think there is room for reasoned discourse on the topic and platforms like Twitter and Reddit don't tend to promote or facilitate that. 

So, here goes...

*They can run the game, just not to their normal relative performance envelope compared to other cards due to the fact that they do not support DX12 Ultimate mesh shaders.

RTX 40 series - aka "Did Nvidia jump the shark"...

Yes, I *splashed out*...

Now that Nvidia have essentially completed their consumer RTX 40 series cards, it's time to look back at the releases and take stock of what's happened. 

We've seen the now usual range of responses: from cynical and jaded gamers and games media, to acceptance from those who are coming to terms with the price to performance ratio Nvidia is now asking. 

Bundled up in all of this has been, for me, the question of whether Nvida pushed too far, too fast? Let's take a look...

The problem with 'dumb' metrics (An argument against using GPU busy)...

With the recent release of the new updated beta version of Presentmon by Intel to include their new metric, GPU Busy, many people have become excited about the potential for it to have some sort of positive impact on the game review and user diagnostic testing landscapes.

However, if you follow me on Twitter, you may have noticed how I've not been impressed by the execution surrounding this metric - something which I think many people might have missed in the hubbub for something new and meaningful in system performance assessments.

This is the story of how dangerous undefined metrics can be in the wrong hands...