Testing with the RX 9060 8 GB instead of the 16 GB version is a USA problem, due to Trumps tariffs.
I think they should have tested with both versions, I’ve heard many places that the 16 GB is way better.
I also think they should have tested with RX 6600 XT which was really good value when it came out. Mostly because it was actually available at MSRP, at a time of very inflated prices. So the price of 6600XT was often cheaper than the price of a used 5600 XT!
Just before the 6600 XT came out, my old RX 580 broke and I returned it, at the time it was sold at 3 times the amount I had paid for it! So I was wondering what would happen? Turned out that of course I didn’t get a replacement or repair, because that would be worth more than I had paid, so I got my money back!! Which kind of sucked because graphics cards were insanely overpriced.
So instead of buying a new one, I took the old Radeon RX 560 I’d used in a media system and used in my main computer, and then I played retro games for about 4 months until the RX 6600 XT came out, which was the first reasonably priced card in a long time.
I’m not sure techspot quite remember the situation back then, if they did I’m sure they’d have used the XT instead of the even cheaper 6600 vanilla that has lower performance and came out later.
Anyways the article is interesting, but it does paint a somewhat unfair picture about AMD IMO.
Also there has been inflation after COVID, so I don’t think it’s fair to stay at strictly $300. The RX 9060 XT 16 GB is actually similarly priced to the 5600 XT, maybe even a bit cheaper when accounting for inflation, and 100% for sure in Europe, and also in USA when accounting for tariffs.
Testing with the RX 9060 8 GB instead of the 16 GB version is a USA problem, due to Trumps tariffs.
I think they should have tested with both versions, I’ve heard many places that the 16 GB is way better.
I also think they should have tested with RX 6600 XT which was really good value when it came out. Mostly because it was actually available at MSRP, at a time of very inflated prices. So the price of 6600XT was often cheaper than the price of a used 5600 XT!
Just before the 6600 XT came out, my old RX 580 broke and I returned it, at the time it was sold at 3 times the amount I had paid for it! So I was wondering what would happen? Turned out that of course I didn’t get a replacement or repair, because that would be worth more than I had paid, so I got my money back!! Which kind of sucked because graphics cards were insanely overpriced.
So instead of buying a new one, I took the old Radeon RX 560 I’d used in a media system and used in my main computer, and then I played retro games for about 4 months until the RX 6600 XT came out, which was the first reasonably priced card in a long time.
I’m not sure techspot quite remember the situation back then, if they did I’m sure they’d have used the XT instead of the even cheaper 6600 vanilla that has lower performance and came out later.
Anyways the article is interesting, but it does paint a somewhat unfair picture about AMD IMO.
Also there has been inflation after COVID, so I don’t think it’s fair to stay at strictly $300. The RX 9060 XT 16 GB is actually similarly priced to the 5600 XT, maybe even a bit cheaper when accounting for inflation, and 100% for sure in Europe, and also in USA when accounting for tariffs.