Tech
Analogue Pocket’s first major update arrives in July
The Analogue Pocket is finally getting some of the important feature updates promised at launch. As The Verge notes, Analogue has promised a Pocket OS 1.1 beta in July that will add the expected Library, Memories and FPGA development features. You can expect advancements to arrive “regularly” after that, according to the company.
Library will amount to an encyclopedia for classic games. Insert a cartridge and you’ll ideally learn everything about your specific copy of a game, including play guides and publisher details. Memories, meanwhile, lets you create save states and screenshots. Although Analogue hasn’t fully explained the development expansion, this will likely let programmers use the Pocket’s second FPGA. They’ll have access to the OS, hardware and features like Memories.
There’s no mention of why 1.1 is taking so long. However, the delay was substantial. Analogue said in December that Library and Memories would be ready in January, but they’re now appearing several months later in a rough form. Not that the wait will matter if you aren’t already an owner. New pre-orders won’t get their Pockets until 2023, so this is is more a kindness to early adopters than anything else.
All products recommended by Engadget are selected by our editorial team, independent of our parent company. Some of our stories include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, we may earn an affiliate commission.
Tech
Nvidia GeForce RTX 3090 vs. AMD Radeon 6950 XT: Which GPU should you buy?
The AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT has been an interesting GPU this generation. It’s both cheaper than the competing Nvidia GeForce RTX 3090—and sometimes faster, too. It’s now been refreshed with the RX 6950 XT, a late entrant into the tumultuous GPU market. Nvidia has also done its part with the GeForce RTX 3090 Ti, which brings impressive performance, albeit with a high cost and power draw at 450W TDP.
With the original RTX 3090 price recently decreasing slightly, it makes for an interesting comparison against the newer AMD RX 6950 XT. The RTX 3090 Ti offers more performance, but is significantly outside of the price bracket of the RX 6950 XT. Is this AMD refresh enough to push performance for AMD ahead of Nvidia, even in the murky waters of ray tracing? More importantly, does it move the needle for high-end gamers enough for them to switch their allegiance from Nvidia to AMD? Let’s find out!
Sapphire RX 6950XT
Brad Chacos
Nvidia RTX 3090 vs. AMD 6950XT: Price
Relax. You can easily find both GPUs in stock now at most retailers, and generally at close to MSRP. The GPU market has experienced a significant downturn during the last several months, with prices quickly dropping from their stratospheric levels.
The AMD RX 6950XT comes in at a $1,099 MSRP for the reference model, and some third-party models range from $1,199 to $1,299. A modest bump from the $999 6900XT pricing—but it does not mean they’re a great deal. With the declining GPU market and murmurs of the next-generation GPUs coming out this year, it has significantly dampened demand and enthusiasm for this level of GPU.
The Nvidia RTX 3090 has also experienced much lower demand, resulting in quickly falling pricing. While you’re still unlikely to find a $1,499 Founders Edition at MSRP, most models such as those from the EVGA RTX 3090 lineup have experienced a significant price drop, coming in as low as $1,609 for the Black series. (The 3090 Ti debuted at $1,999, a big increase over the RTX 3090—and it’s already being discounted at many retailers, too)
The pricing on the used market is even lower, however, with RTX 3090s dipping close to the $1,200 mark in many cases.
Neither model is a great price-to-performance choice this late into the release cycle, however. Most high-end gamers who don’t have a top-tier GPU will likely be best served by waiting for the next generation this year.
The AMD RX 6950 XT is the latest to test its mettle against Nvidia.
Thiago Trevisan
Nvidia RTX 3090 vs. AMD 6950XT: Performance
AMD certainly threw in a surprising performance with the original 6900 XT—it was able to match or beat the RTX 3090 in certain games and scenarios. Has the RX 6950 XT finally crossed the Rubicon in all performance areas? Not quite. When it comes to ray tracing performance, the RTX 3090 is still out ahead. (Check out Brad Chacos’ review for a deeper dive on the new AMD refreshes.)
Thiago Trevisan
In games such as Watch Dogs Legion with traditional rasterization, we can see the AMD RX 6950 XT performing as well or better than the RTX 3090 (especially at lower resolutions). This trend continues in other games such as Horizon Zero Dawn, where it’s able to keep up with the RTX 3090. Game after game, both GPUs trade blows and are highly competitive with each other.
Both GPUs have party tricks up their sleeves for performance, too. AMD has Smart Access Memory that can boost performance when coupled with a Ryzen CPU, along with Radeon Super Resolution. This will give it significant boosts in many games, besting the RTX 3090 in some cases, as shown below in Horizon Zero Dawn. Nvidia also has DLSS technology that does wonders for keeping graphical fidelity and high frames simultaneously—which is a gamer changer when paired with ray tracing.
Thiago Trevisan
What happens when we introduce ray tracing? That’s where Nvidia’s RTX 3090 still holds an advantage over AMD. The 6950 XT does not have upgraded ray tracing hardware when compared to the 6900 XT, keeping it behind the Nvidia RTX GPUs in this case.
It can be argued that there are diminishing returns for ray tracing visuals and performance, with varying results. The technology puts insane strain on performance, lowering frame rates significantly until you claw some back with the help of an upscaling technology like DLSS or AMD’s FSR. The visual impact doesn’t always make losing that performance worthwhile, either. But when it comes to the “halo” GPUs like these, ray tracing can be part of the reason you get a high-end GPU in the first place; you want to turn all the eye candy up to Ultra, including ray tracing. Paired with Nvidia’s DLSS, the performance penalty can be mitigated, and the visuals enjoyed fully.
This is one big advantage of the RTX 3090 versus the newer 6950 XT—maximum performance and visuals matter when you’re spending way over $1,000 for a GPU. AMD’s ray tracing hardware is a generation behind Nvidia’s implementation, while its DLSS rival, FSR 2.0, is great but still in its infancy, with only a handful of games supporting the fledgling technology at this point. That means ray tracing is best experienced at 1440p resolution on the 6950 XT, while you can usually crank ray traced games even at 4K on the 3090. If you’re not interested in ray tracing however, the 6950 XT is a mighty fine choice for significantly less cost.
Let’s not forget that the RTX 3090 is certainly better geared towards content creation and other workstation use cases, as well. With a whopping 24GB of GDDR6x VRAM, it will handily beat the 16GB RX 6950 XT in most content creation tasks. The 3080 Ti would be a more reasonable competitor to the 6950 XT in this case as a pure gaming solution.
Nvidia RTX 3090 vs. AMD 6950 XT: Power and other things to know
The RTX 3090 packs a TDP of 350W, with many third-party models eclipsing 400W. The RX 6950 XT comes in a 335W TDP, which is reasonable for the performance that it puts out. Remember, the 3090 Ti is already up to 450W TDP—so next-generation offerings will likely go up significantly in requirements.
You’ll want a minimum of a 750W power supply for both, but we’d recommend you up that even higher for future proofing—as high-quality power supplies tend to last a long time.
You’ll need a case with good airflow for both these options, and better clearance than lesser GPUs require. (They’re often wrapped in a nice, thick, beefy air coolers to keep their temperatures in check.)
Which is the better option for water cooling? We’d argue that the RTX 3090 is, since it likely will have a wider range of water blocks available on the market. Plus, with its steaming-hot VRAM, it often benefits more from taking a deep swim versus the typically cooler RX 6950 XT.
So, is the 6950 XT enough to best the RTX 3090?
The 6950 XT is a slightly more powerful addition to the high-end AMD lineup, putting up an impressive performance versus the RTX 3090. It’s simple: If you’re playing at higher resolutions and want to use ray tracing, Nvidia still holds an advantage here. DLSS and the Nvidia encoders are also great technologies that serve people well.
If you’re after pure frame rate goodness—without as much ray tracing, the 6950 XT can be often a much better choice than the RTX 3090, especially in sub-4K resolutions. AMD offers great technologies such as FSR, Smart Access Memory to really up the performance too.
So, who wins? Unfortunately, the 6950 XT comes in too late in the release cycle to be relevant in the rapidly declining GPU market, making it an expensive option. The aging RTX 3090 is a similar story. Its high price was never a very good option for purely gaming—making better use for hybrid content creators/gamers instead. The RTX 3090 Ti is an even worse value proposition this late into the story, making it only relevant for a few high-end enthusiasts who don’t mind the price tag.
3090 Ti: The symbol for diminishing returns in an ever changing market. Beautiful, but flawed!
IDG
The verdict: This is a good ole’ fashioned standstill. We’d wait out the market a few months as both will experience even steeper declines in price with the introduction of the next generation. Otherwise, if you really must have one now, the decision will come down to ray tracing preference and resolution you’re playing at. Both GPUs will give you good, all-around performance for years to come—but neither are a great choice right now as the GPU market is rapidly changing this year.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
Tech
Receive near instant feedback on logos, images, text, and more with Helpfull
StackCommerce
People commonly ask colleagues for feedback from time to time. But that can be fraught with challenges. After all, how are you to know if they’re genuinely being honest? This is why folks turn to Helpfull when they need honest and constructive reactions and reviews.
The Helpfull Feedback Platform provides creators and businesses easy access to unbiased and detailed criticism for logos, images, text, and more. Create your survey, upload the content you want to be reviewed, and choose your demographics. Within minutes you’ll get constructive feedback from users, so you’ll know what works and, more importantly, what doesn’t.
You might find Helpfull particularly valuable if you’re an app developer or work in QA. QA Specialist Karla Q writes, “Helpfull is a great service to use if you need feedback in real time. In a very interactive and fun way that makes you excited to view the results.”
With the Helpfull Premium Plan, you’ll get two free questions per test and 50 credits per month. Additionally, you can export results to PDF or Excel for further analysis, they offer support via phone or the web, and it’s also compatible with all operating systems. And since a one-year subscription is on sale for only $39, it’s easy to fit the cost within virtually any budget.
Helpfull Feedback Platform: 1-Yr Subscription – $39
Prices subject to change.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
Tech
Confessions of an in-house creative strategist on feeling unfulfilled, difficulty in returning to agencies as the ‘pay is less’
The war for talent between agencies and brands’ in-house agencies has cooled. Even so, for adland talent who’ve made the move in-house, some say they are looking to go back to agencies after feeling creatively stifled. It’s not the easiest strategy to execute.
In the latest edition of our Confessions series, in which we trade anonymity for candor, we hear from an in-house creative strategist about their experience, why they want to go agency-side now and how pay is keeping them from doing so.
This conversation has been lightly edited and condensed for clarity.
What’s the in-house experience like?
I’ve been in-house for about a year. It’s very one-sided. The difference between agency and in-house is that with agencies, there [are] a lot of opinions and ideas [outside of the brand message] that go into creative. With in-house, you have the brand’s message and all creative is reflective of the brand’s message. With in-house, regardless of trends in the market, it’s a lot of ‘we’re going to stick to this one way of doing things’ mentality. It’s a lot of opinions about what the creative should be based on what it has been before. It makes it hard to introduce something fresh. It makes it hard to hire or be a new hire. If you’re not actually going to adhere to advice from new hires, what’s the point in getting new people? Are you just bringing people on board for a second opinion? That’s what it feels like.
Sounds like you don’t have the creative control you desire.
It feels like more of a second opinion role than to get something to manage or control. [Where I am now] it feels like we’re leaning more into what [our strategy] used to be than thinking about what we could be. That’s a big issue with in-house. With agencies, like I said, there’s a lot more trial and error. With in-house, a lot more of this is what we’re doing, these are the funds we have and this is what has worked in the past. In reality, a lot of what worked in the past, when you put it back into the market, it’s not going to work anymore.
Why do you think it’s more challenging to get to a new creative strategy in-house?
With agencies, you have multiple perspectives. You’re working on multiple brands. You can see something working for another brand and talk to your client about it. You can pivot. You have the background and perspective to [pitch that pivot]. When you’re in-house, you only have the knowledge of your brand and what’s working for you.
Are you looking to go back to agencies?
Personally, I am looking to go from in-house to agency but I get paid a lot more being in-house than what I’ve been offered at agencies. I’ve been in interviews with agencies where they’re telling me that I’ll be learning [programs I already know how to use] so that’s why the pay is less than what it should be. There are agencies I’ve interviewed with who ask me to move to New York for less than what I make now and make that work. [With inflation,] there’s no reason why salaries aren’t also increasing.
So you’d like to make the jump creatively but it’s hard when the compensation isn’t up to what in-house offers?
It’s hard. I’ve been lowballed, too. They’ll post a salary for a position, go through the interviews and then offer less than what’s listed on the salary description. What was the point of putting the salary range there? I feel like people are putting salary ranges on job descriptions just to attract people with the experience that they are looking for but by the time they make the offer, it’s not what they said it would be. It’s offensive.
-
Ethereum3 months ago
Michael Saylor’s MacroStrategy Secures $205 Million Loan to Buy More Bitcoin
-
Bit Coin3 months ago
Nifty Gateway Partners With Samsung to Develop ‘First-Ever Smart TV NFT Platform’
-
Tech3 months ago
How ‘eQuad’ Electric Bikes Could Change UPS Delivery
-
Bit Coin3 months ago
Bitcoin suddenly dives to $46K as attention focuses on large CME futures gaps
-
Tech3 months ago
Instagram’s latest test makes it easier to support social causes
-
Bit Coin3 months ago
Binance launches Binance Bridge 2.0 to integrate CeFi and DeFi
-
Cryptocurrency3 months ago
Layer-2 aggregator platform Coinweb receives crypto exchange license from Lithuanian regulator
-
Bit Coin3 months ago
Axie Infinity hacked for $612M, OpenSea expands support to Solana, EU’s unhosted wallet regulations cause a stir: Hodler’s Digest, March 27-April 2