I want to upgrade my pc. I found someone selling a used MSI Radeon RX 6900 XT, and someone else selling a used Nvidia RTX 3080 Ti for the same price. Which one should i get? I do not care about dlss, but I am worried about amd driver stability. Maybe that's an outdated concern?

Llama 4 Scout (changed mind)

Vote: MSI Radeon RX 6900 XT

After reviewing the arguments from other models, I have changed my position to vote for the MSI Radeon RX 6900 XT. The main reasons are its competitive or superior rasterization performance compared to the Nvidia RTX 3080 Ti, 16GB of VRAM versus 12GB, and generally better power efficiency. Additionally, concerns about AMD driver stability are largely outdated for RDNA 2 cards like the 6900 XT. The arguments presented by models such as Grok 4.1 Fast, Claude Opus 4.6, Gemini 3.1 Pro, and DeepSeek V3.2 have convinced me that the 6900 XT offers better value and performance for the price.

Grok 4.1 Fast

Vote: MSI Radeon RX 6900 XT

Sticking with A: MSI Radeon RX 6900 XT. Rasterization benchmarks (e.g., TechPowerUp, Hardware Unboxed) confirm the 6900 XT outperforms the 3080 Ti by 5-15% at 1440p/4K in most games without RT/DLSS—e.g., Cyberpunk 2077 raster: 6900 XT +10% faster; Forza Horizon 5: +8%. The 16GB VRAM crushes 12GB for 4K/ultra textures/mods (e.g., no stutters in Starfield). AMD drivers are stable post-RDNA 2 maturation; crash rates match/exceed Nvidia's 30-series issues (e.g., black screens fixed via DDU). User ignores DLSS, neutralizing Nvidia's edge; FSR 3.1 works cross-vendor. B arguments fail: Llama/GPT claim 'better Nvidia perf/drivers'—debunked by data. Nvidia ecosystem irrelevant for pure gaming. 6900 XT's efficiency (350W vs 400W+) and value win at equal price. No reason to switch.

GPT-5.4 (changed mind)

Vote: MSI Radeon RX 6900 XT

I’m changing my vote to A. The strongest point from the other models is that if DLSS is irrelevant to the buyer, the 3080 Ti loses a major practical advantage. At that point, this comparison becomes mostly raster performance, VRAM, efficiency, and used-buy longevity. On those terms, the 6900 XT makes more sense. It is very competitive with the 3080 Ti in raster and often ahead, while also offering 16 GB VRAM versus 12 GB. In 2025, that extra VRAM is a meaningful benefit for newer games, high textures, mods, and avoiding edge-case memory limits. The AMD driver concern is also not a strong reason to avoid RDNA 2 anymore. The bad reputation largely came from older periods, especially RX 5000-era discourse. For a mature card like the 6900 XT, driver stability is generally fine. What ultimately changed my mind is that my prior case for B leaned on Nvidia’s broader ecosystem and lower-risk reputation, but the user explicitly narrowed the question: they do not care about DLSS and specifically asked whether AMD stability fears are outdated. Given that framing, the better direct answer is the 6900 XT. I still think the 3080 Ti is a good pick if ray tracing, CUDA, NVENC, or certain software workflows matter. But based on the user’s stated priorities alone, A is the stronger recommendation.

DeepSeek V3.2

Vote: MSI Radeon RX 6900 XT

The arguments for the RTX 3080 Ti, while valid, do not outweigh the advantages of the RX 6900 XT for this specific user. Concerns about AMD driver stability are indeed outdated, as multiple models confirmed that RDNA 2 drivers have matured and are now reliable. In raw rasterization performance, the 6900 XT often matches or exceeds the 3080 Ti, which is critical since DLSS is not a factor. The extra 4GB of VRAM on the 6900 XT provides significant future-proofing for high-resolution gaming and demanding applications. Nvidia's broader software ecosystem, such as CUDA or NVENC, is less relevant if the user primarily games and has no stated need for these features. At the same price, the 6900 XT delivers superior gaming performance and longevity without driver concerns.

Claude Opus 4.6

Vote: MSI Radeon RX 6900 XT

I'm maintaining my vote for the RX 6900 XT. The arguments from the B voters were reasonable but not compelling enough to change my position. GPT-5.4 made the strongest case for the 3080 Ti, citing CUDA, NVENC, and broader software compatibility. These are valid points — but the user specifically asked about a PC upgrade for gaming and mentioned DLSS and driver stability as their concerns. They didn't mention content creation, streaming, or CUDA workloads. For a pure gaming use case, these Nvidia ecosystem advantages are less relevant. Llama 4 Scout's claim that the 3080 Ti offers 'superior performance' is simply inaccurate. In rasterization benchmarks, the 6900 XT matches or beats the 3080 Ti in the majority of titles. The 3080 Ti only pulls ahead in ray tracing workloads, which is a niche advantage. The core facts remain unchanged: at the same price, the 6900 XT offers competitive or better rasterization performance, 16GB vs 12GB VRAM (a meaningful advantage as games push higher texture demands), better power efficiency, and the user's two potential Nvidia advantages (DLSS and driver stability) are non-factors — they explicitly don't care about DLSS, and RDNA 2 drivers have been stable for years. The 'lower-risk buy' argument for Nvidia has some merit for less tech-savvy buyers, but the user is clearly knowledgeable enough to be comparing specific GPU SKUs and asking informed questions about driver maturity. The 4GB VRAM advantage alone is a tangible, measurable benefit that will only grow more important over time. The RX 6900 XT is the better pick here.

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Vote: MSI Radeon RX 6900 XT

I am standing firm on my vote for the RX 6900 XT. The arguments for the RTX 3080 Ti from Llama 4 Scout and GPT-5.4 focus heavily on Nvidia ecosystem features like NVENC, CUDA, and Ray Tracing. However, for a user whose primary concern is pure gaming performance without relying on upscaling (DLSS), the 16GB of VRAM on the 6900 XT is a massive, tangible advantage over the 12GB on the 3080 Ti. We are already seeing modern titles exceed 12GB of VRAM at 1440p and 4K, which leads to severe stuttering and texture pop-in on lesser-equipped cards. Furthermore, even GPT-5.4 admits that AMD's driver stability issues are an outdated concern for mainstream use. The RDNA 2 architecture is mature and remarkably stable. When you strip away the Nvidia-specific software suite that the user hasn't asked for, you are left comparing a 16GB card that runs cooler and faster in traditional rasterization against a hotter, power-hungry 12GB card. At the exact same price, the 6900 XT's longevity makes it the undeniably superior choice.

Final Summary

The AI Roundtable initially split over the 'safe bet' of Nvidia versus the raw power of AMD, but the debate quickly consolidated into a unanimous recommendation for the RX 6900 XT. While Llama 4 Scout and GPT-5.4 initially leaned toward the RTX 3080 Ti's reliable ecosystem, they were eventually swayed by Claude Opus 4.6 and Grok 4.1 Fast, who argued that Nvidia's primary advantages are irrelevant if the user doesn't care about DLSS. The final consensus was that the 6900 XT's 16GB of VRAM and superior rasterization performance make it the objectively better long-term investment at the same price point.

All 6 models agreed on "MSI Radeon RX 6900 XT" after discussion

Strongest Arguments

• MSI Radeon RX 6900 XT: Since you do not care about DLSS, the RTX 3080 Ti loses its greatest software advantage; the 6900 XT’s 16GB of VRAM and superior rasterization benchmarks make it the clear winner for pure gaming longevity.
• Nvidia RTX 3080 Ti: The Nvidia ecosystem, including CUDA, NVENC, and generally more mature driver support, provides a lower-risk 'peace of mind' purchase for used hardware.

Key Turning Points

• Claude Opus 4.6 pointed out that the user's specific lack of interest in DLSS neutralized Nvidia's most compelling feature.
• Grok 4.1 Fast cited specific rasterization benchmarks showing the 6900 XT leading by 5-15% in non-Ray Tracing titles.
• GPT-5.4 admitted that its initial preference for Nvidia was based on a 'broader ecosystem' argument that the user's specific prompt had effectively ruled out.