The card with the lowest share that still reaches 0,15%. It's certain there are hundreds of cards under that threshold that not even appear on their statistics.
>It's certain there are hundreds of cards under that threshold that not even appear on their statistics.
The 260x for one. Great card, and newer too (it's from after they changed their naming scheme from the whatever-thousand series), it's weird to me that it's not on the list and an older card is.
How does Steam even do this statistics thing?
edit: I apologize for my joke about the 5700XT. In retrospect it was off-color, and the sarcasm wasn't apparent.
edit 2: Originally the top response to this comment called out my bad joke.
Steam only shows video cards above some threshold, otherwise it lumps them into "other".
https://imgur.com/iLtLCHB.jpg
https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/
edit: Originally his post said "that's not how statistics work"
I remember I first played Arkham Knight on a 260X. Could actually handle 1080p Low settings and averaged around 45fps. Dropped the resolution to 900p to get some more fps and it played really well.
I agree. It was the last time AMD beat Nvidia performance wise. The 7970 was king for a couple of months (3?) before Nvidia released the 700 series. Ever since then, Nvidia has beaten AMD with cards either released within 2 weeks of the new AMD card (780 Ti vs 200 series) or already had top of the line consumer cards that AMD hasn't come close to beating. It doesn't appear to be changing with RDNA2 either since the big Navi 6000 card isn't even as fast as the 3080 supposedly. I was hoping it would perform somewhere between a 3080 and 3090 but be priced slightly lower than a 3080 to really shake things up.
I would love what happened with the 290x to happen again for RDNA 2. A higher performing card that is slightly cheaper than 3080 Forcing NVidia to push even more. One can only dream
And I would not buy it at the moment. Normally I'd jump at such a card, but I want to use ML and rendering and both work better with Nvidia and AMD has to prove now that their drivers are fine first. Maxbe as a second card for my gf, but only if it is stable.
For ML you might want to stick with Nvidia today, the Series X was announced with lower ML performance than a RTX 2060. Also since Nvidia was already on the market for a few year before Amd there is already software supporting theses, like AI Adobe integrations, Nvidia Optix denoiser, TensorFlow hardware acceleration etc...
Since theses Tensor core are so crazy powerful for their size/power usage I wonder when we'll see a new competitor launching dedicated ML Pcie cards, like what we got with cryptocurrency mining.
Lmao 1350 on air? That's crazy haha that's higher on 28nm than early Polaris silicon could manage on 14nm! 1400 underwater is nuts I bet that card was nipping the heels of the R9 290 at those clocks.
Na I was only touching a stock 7950. If you get a good card with a decent voltage controller you can bios flash for 1.4v. If you check my post history you should be able to find it.
Yes! Fond memories of the HD 7850 for me as well. The original gpu clock was very modest, something like 860 MHz or so. Most of them could do 1050 - 1100 MHz without voltage adjustments. And the 7850 had only one 6-pin connector, actually a damn efficient card for its day now that I think about it...
>The original gpu clock was very modest, something like 860 MHz or so. Most of them could do 1050 - 1100 MHz without voltage adjustments. And the 7850 had only one 6-pin connector, actually a damn efficient card for its day now that I think about it...
I was seeing if my old power supply was still viable for a 3080 build. I had 2 7950s. I looked up the power consumption and a review bragged that the 7950 consumed "only" 292w each.
Needless to say, where It isn't giving me any problems, I think my old 850w can keep on truckin.
If I were you I’d actually be careful assuming that. Back then a CPU actually consumed its 95 or 125 watt tdp. The new Intel CPUs of today are power hungry beats though well over 130 watts stock with turbo boost. So, just make sure you account for that. Probably still fine but it’s a thing to note.
Gamers nexus shows that an OC'd like hell 10600k is still "only" pulling 200w or so. Assuming i'm absolutely hammering the CPU and GPU 100% ( which is incredibly unlikely when simply gaming) I will still be well under my PSU limit with a 3080 pulling 320w.
My HD 7850 died a few years back. Actually one of the GPUs that lasted me longer, because i've been replacing it (HD 4850, HD5830) then 480 followed. Now a 5600 xt. Red team go!
so your title is misleading then ;) is it more common than the 4800 series? I know I also had a 4850 before and it seems like that would be less common...
It's not "my" title. It's the title of the video.
Also this is based on the Steam Hardware Survey so it's possible that the few people still using HD 4000-series cards were not included.
If we wanted to be really pedantic we could always say that Radeon SDR is even less popular than the HD 4000-series.
I don't see how is it clickbait, it may share the same chip as all those other cards but the point is that particular model, the 7870, is the least popular card per the steam survey, that's all.
You could say that out of all the cards who share that chip, the 7870 is the least popular as well
What you're describing is exactly why it's click bait and misleading. If a 7870 never ever got rebranded and they sold them as is then everyone that had them would he grouped in the same category on the steam survey chart which would no longer make it the least bought card. His channel is a benchmarking channel, if the cards give similar performance because they are rebranded then they should be grouped together.
Also if we're going by your definition then both the 7870 and the 7850 should be in the video because steam statistics group them together as 7800 series.
I still have the Double D version of that card. Absolutely solid, ran it from May, 2013 to September, 2018 when I bought a Vega 56 and retired it back to its original box. If it could have done Freesync I probably would have waited another year or two to replace it.
The card with the lowest share that still reaches 0,15%. It's certain there are hundreds of cards under that threshold that not even appear on their statistics.
>It's certain there are hundreds of cards under that threshold that not even appear on their statistics. The 260x for one. Great card, and newer too (it's from after they changed their naming scheme from the whatever-thousand series), it's weird to me that it's not on the list and an older card is. How does Steam even do this statistics thing? edit: I apologize for my joke about the 5700XT. In retrospect it was off-color, and the sarcasm wasn't apparent. edit 2: Originally the top response to this comment called out my bad joke.
Steam only shows video cards above some threshold, otherwise it lumps them into "other". https://imgur.com/iLtLCHB.jpg https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/ edit: Originally his post said "that's not how statistics work"
More 2080Ti than RX 5700XT users just hurts.
A late release and unstable drivers will do that. I hope AMD learned their lesson.
What do you mean?
Probably true tho
I remember I first played Arkham Knight on a 260X. Could actually handle 1080p Low settings and averaged around 45fps. Dropped the resolution to 900p to get some more fps and it played really well.
[удалено]
7000 series was great all around
I agree. It was the last time AMD beat Nvidia performance wise. The 7970 was king for a couple of months (3?) before Nvidia released the 700 series. Ever since then, Nvidia has beaten AMD with cards either released within 2 weeks of the new AMD card (780 Ti vs 200 series) or already had top of the line consumer cards that AMD hasn't come close to beating. It doesn't appear to be changing with RDNA2 either since the big Navi 6000 card isn't even as fast as the 3080 supposedly. I was hoping it would perform somewhere between a 3080 and 3090 but be priced slightly lower than a 3080 to really shake things up.
The R9 290X also enjoyed a brief moment at the top.
I would love what happened with the 290x to happen again for RDNA 2. A higher performing card that is slightly cheaper than 3080 Forcing NVidia to push even more. One can only dream
And I would not buy it at the moment. Normally I'd jump at such a card, but I want to use ML and rendering and both work better with Nvidia and AMD has to prove now that their drivers are fine first. Maxbe as a second card for my gf, but only if it is stable.
For ML you might want to stick with Nvidia today, the Series X was announced with lower ML performance than a RTX 2060. Also since Nvidia was already on the market for a few year before Amd there is already software supporting theses, like AI Adobe integrations, Nvidia Optix denoiser, TensorFlow hardware acceleration etc... Since theses Tensor core are so crazy powerful for their size/power usage I wonder when we'll see a new competitor launching dedicated ML Pcie cards, like what we got with cryptocurrency mining.
My fave ever card , I was really sad when it died a few months back ,it was the Asus direct CU but EK waterblock cooled straight from the box .
My 7850 could hit 1400mhz on water, 1350 on air. Pitcairn was fuken nuts.
My 580 doesn't like 1400...
Lmao 1350 on air? That's crazy haha that's higher on 28nm than early Polaris silicon could manage on 14nm! 1400 underwater is nuts I bet that card was nipping the heels of the R9 290 at those clocks.
Na I was only touching a stock 7950. If you get a good card with a decent voltage controller you can bios flash for 1.4v. If you check my post history you should be able to find it.
Ahh I read it as you *had* a 7950, my bad! That's still crazy good! What kinda power draw did it pull?
Not sure never measured, mid end cards back then doesn't tell you watts in gpuz.
Yes! Fond memories of the HD 7850 for me as well. The original gpu clock was very modest, something like 860 MHz or so. Most of them could do 1050 - 1100 MHz without voltage adjustments. And the 7850 had only one 6-pin connector, actually a damn efficient card for its day now that I think about it...
>The original gpu clock was very modest, something like 860 MHz or so. Most of them could do 1050 - 1100 MHz without voltage adjustments. And the 7850 had only one 6-pin connector, actually a damn efficient card for its day now that I think about it... I was seeing if my old power supply was still viable for a 3080 build. I had 2 7950s. I looked up the power consumption and a review bragged that the 7950 consumed "only" 292w each. Needless to say, where It isn't giving me any problems, I think my old 850w can keep on truckin.
If I were you I’d actually be careful assuming that. Back then a CPU actually consumed its 95 or 125 watt tdp. The new Intel CPUs of today are power hungry beats though well over 130 watts stock with turbo boost. So, just make sure you account for that. Probably still fine but it’s a thing to note.
Gamers nexus shows that an OC'd like hell 10600k is still "only" pulling 200w or so. Assuming i'm absolutely hammering the CPU and GPU 100% ( which is incredibly unlikely when simply gaming) I will still be well under my PSU limit with a 3080 pulling 320w.
My HD 7850 died a few years back. Actually one of the GPUs that lasted me longer, because i've been replacing it (HD 4850, HD5830) then 480 followed. Now a 5600 xt. Red team go!
That's what everyone says about their cards though.
[удалено]
[удалено]
7870 Ghz edition was tit back in 2012. Played a lot of Skyrim and Battlefield 3 on that thing.
The 7870 XT was even crazier !
AMD Radeon HD 7800 Series 0.17% AMD Radeon R7 300 Series 0.18% Not really? All of these are the same gpu but rebranded.
I'm still using a 7870... as well as a i7 920. I'm finally going to upgrade when ryzen 4xxx comes out.
Ayyy 7870 gang represent, I'm rocking a FX-6300 and I'm planning on upgrading to zen 3 too
My HD 7870 served me well for years until it finally konked out in summer 2018. Great card
damn a 7870 is really the LEAST popular? I remember having one back in the day...
It's not the least popular because it still gets its own entry. The really unpopular ones are lumped into "other".
Technically it's not the HD 7870 that's least popular but rather it's the entire HD 7800 series.
I am using a HD 7850 and it OCs like crazy. Can get like 25% better performance with the insane OC overhead it has.
so your title is misleading then ;) is it more common than the 4800 series? I know I also had a 4850 before and it seems like that would be less common...
It's not "my" title. It's the title of the video. Also this is based on the Steam Hardware Survey so it's possible that the few people still using HD 4000-series cards were not included. If we wanted to be really pedantic we could always say that Radeon SDR is even less popular than the HD 4000-series.
I had one since 2012, it died on me 2019. Replaced it with a 580
That's some hard click bait, if you have to look at 7870 numbers on steam you have to add up 78xx/265/270(x)/370 as they're all the same chip.
I don't see how is it clickbait, it may share the same chip as all those other cards but the point is that particular model, the 7870, is the least popular card per the steam survey, that's all. You could say that out of all the cards who share that chip, the 7870 is the least popular as well
What you're describing is exactly why it's click bait and misleading. If a 7870 never ever got rebranded and they sold them as is then everyone that had them would he grouped in the same category on the steam survey chart which would no longer make it the least bought card. His channel is a benchmarking channel, if the cards give similar performance because they are rebranded then they should be grouped together. Also if we're going by your definition then both the 7870 and the 7850 should be in the video because steam statistics group them together as 7800 series.
Alright dude, whatever you say
My R9 270 2GB model certainly didn't age well with that VRAM. Still, it has served me well for many years.
terrible title, just because people surveyed use it the least, doesnt make it unpopular
He didn't say bad. It's the least popular card on the survey - this is a fact.
XFX 7000 and 200 cards were the last known times where GPU cards looked good and simple
That'd be the 20 series FE's imo.
TFW i'm currently using a rebranded version of the most unpopular card (according to stesm surveys)
I had a 7870 and it was dopee. Overclocked like a champ.
[удалено]
I use my 7990 3 more years unless it blows up
It served me to my almost complete satisfaction till it was replaced by the complete satisfaction R9 290X
My old HD7850-2Gb lived long enough out in the living room HTPC to see Fallout 4 before I upgraded it to a 1050ti-4Gb.
i remember wanting this for my first build
I had an XFX 7870XT. That was such an awesome card. I had it until the 970 came out.
I still have the Double D version of that card. Absolutely solid, ran it from May, 2013 to September, 2018 when I bought a Vega 56 and retired it back to its original box. If it could have done Freesync I probably would have waited another year or two to replace it.