RE: 1. The drivers should've been matured by now
Clearly they haven't and based on history you will have a while to wait, at least another 3 months if you are lucky.
RE: 2. Performance wise, AMD beats Nvidia
Those GPU were designed for 4K /2K not 1080p.
Nvidia are faster at 4K for sure and it is ~ a tie at 2K.
RE: 3. Don't give a **** about a Ray Tracing
Given the performance in latest AAA games and still no DLSS equivalent, neither do AMD.
RE: 4. I m not talking about CPU I am talking about GPU.
I am not "trashing AMD".
Who told you these GPUs weren't designed for 1080? They're being commercialized to be 2k and 4k, but in 1080p you 200+ fps, fyi there are monitors with refresh rates up to 360hz, competitive games that's what you want, so do a little more study on that and then come back.
"Nividia is better at 4k" Have you actaully watched benchmarks on youtube? Let me give you a link, you can do more research https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_P6CkP4EnY&t=526s&ab_channel=BENCHMARKSFORGAMERS
I guess the only solution is wait.
Yeah, I guess ill just play my games in windowed mode and see if within the year they release a fix or even acknowledge the issue.
More than 16GB of VRAM tells me these GPU were not designed for 1080p.
CPU performance will be most important at 1080p for these GPU anyhow.
Nvidia RTX3000 series GPUs beat the AMD cards at 4K in most cases.
As for 200+FPS for "competitive gamers" at 1080p and 360Hz gaming monitors yada yada.
I have seen plenty of blind tests where "competitive gamers" couldn't tell the difference between 360 and 240Hz monitors.
The only solution is AMD fix the drivers sooner or go Nvidia.