AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT Drops to $710 on Newegg, MSRP Lowered to $749

[Dave65]

After watching this and as an AMD fan AMD has some work to do, better get off their ass before I just ship.

 

[Dirt Chip]

Valid response to NV's SUPER.
We don't need more fps, we need lower cost.

 

[RandomWan]

AM5 has slow boot times, not really smiling when using AMD platforms during boot. I hit my desktop within 5 secs on hitting the power button. This is one of the biggest problems on AMD. Insanely slow boot times. Luckily its not 2+ minutes anymore. Best you can get is like 30-45 sec. Sadly many boards are still at the 1+ minute mark.

I can't speak to all implementations since I haven't built enough AM5 systems, but MSI boards with latest BIOS and Memory Context Restore enabled boot in ~10 seconds with Expo. Leaving it to memory train whenever it wants to leads to crap shoots.

 

[theouto]

I prefer the Nvidia CP over the gamey-look of AMD drivers for sure. Anti Lag+ got people Steam banned recently. Rushed out beta features that don't really work is mainly what AMD does. Also AMD Radeon drivers were bricking windows installs not that long ago, on several driver versions. AMDs drivers are absolutely not better than Nvidias and lacks day one and beta drivers most of the time.

1.- Just say control panel man....
2.- It was not steam banned, it was a VAC ban on CS2, and that was rectified.
I use an AMD gpu, really the only time I've had trouble is when OCing is involved, so nothing unexpected.

I can't speak to all implementations since I haven't built enough AM5 systems, but MSI boards with latest BIOS and Memory Context Restore enabled boot in ~10 seconds with Expo. Leaving it to memory train whenever it wants to leads to crap shoots.

Man I need to look into that

7900XT is not a good card for me. Just accept it. If 7900XT was a great card it would be selling like hotcakes, but no AMD GPUs are selling well. They are forced to cut prices to even make people interrested. And still they don't sell well.

Didn't the 7800XT sell out?

I have been using 12VHPWR since day one 4090 came out and clicked right in and runs flawless.

Instead of reading stuff on the internet, you should try first hand experience

Works fine on my machine (tm)

 

[Guwapo77]

Doesn't even matter... bring on the next generation!

 

[Beginner Macro Device]

We don't need more fps

Speak for yourself. xD

 

[JAB Creations]

The 4070 series competes with the likes of the 7700. You have to be clinically brain-dead to blow $800 on a 12GB card these days. I've already maxed out my RX 6800's 16GB of VRAM in several different scenarios at 1440P.

If the 4070 Ti Super perform better, and sells at the MSRP, then even with this cut will not be enough.

For people who like bending over for Nvidia, sure!

 

[Deleted member 237269]

I can't speak to all implementations since I haven't built enough AM5 systems, but MSI boards with latest BIOS and Memory Context Restore enabled boot in ~10 seconds with Expo. Leaving it to memory train whenever it wants to leads to crap shoots.

Hold on, i have the ATX MSI MPG X670E Carbon WiFi / 7800x3d and it’s a 35-45s boot time. If you got a link/step by step on how to make this go faster.

 

[RandomWan]

Hold on, i have the ATX MSI MPG X670E Carbon WiFi / 7800x3d and it’s a 35-45s boot time. If you got a link/step by step on how to make this go faster.

I just built one for a customer using the same board in the video below with a 7800X3D. Even on latest BIOS, it was doing the forever to boot training cycle with Expo until I enabled this setting. Once it had a full boot into Windows, it kept the memory timings and would boot in a timeframe expected with a gen 4 NVME. It even booted the same while using a USB drive with WindowsPE.

It's under the OC Settings.

 

[Avro Arrow]

Steve Burke said that this card was a fantastic deal at $720 so pricing it at $710 should increase sales by a good amount. I see that Newegg has three models for $710:

1. ASRock Radeon RX 7900 XT Phantom Gaming OC 20GB
2. Sapphire Radeon RX 7900 XT Pulse 20GB
3. XFX Radeon RX 7900 XT Speedster MERC310 20GB

Unfortunately, these prices don't seem to exist outside of the USA. Here in Canada, the XFX model is the least expensive at $1,080CAD ($800USD). It's darkly ironic since Radeons are born here.

After watching this and as an AMD fan AMD has some work to do, better get off their ass before I just ship.

Don't you mean "jump ship"?

1.- Just say control panel man....
2.- It was not steam banned, it was a VAC ban on CS2, and that was rectified.
I use an AMD, really the only time I've had trouble is when OCing is involved, so nothing unexpected.


Man I need to look into that


Didn't the 7800XT sell out?


Works fine on my machine (tm)

Clearly, that's an nVidia fanboy drinking the kool-aid because it's the first time that I've read someone preferring nVidia's user interface over Adrenalin. You're also correct about the RX 7800 XT because TweakTown did an article about exactly that back in November:
AMD's top-end RDNA 3 sales blow away NVIDIA rivals - is this why new Super GPUs are coming?
Some people just make things up as they go along which usually manifests itself as someone making ridiculous and partisan claims without evidence. Whenever I say something that would appear counter-intuitive, I automatically include evidence (links and/or pics) because I don't expect people to just take my word for it. Clearly, this person is of the "trust me bro" mentality.

 

[Cheeseball]

Just need AMD themselves to officially drop the MSRP and we're golden:

$850 was still overpriced for the 7900XT with $800 being good enough. But at $750 that would be very competitive with the RTX 4070 Ti and its Super kin.

Just need the XTX to be at $850 to $900 and they can give NVIDIA a run for their money, even though the 4080 SUPER will beat it regardless.

 

[mechtech]

I promise you that a 7900XT is plenty fast for Native 4K but I don't know what I am talking about I have only been using this PC since January 2023 and enjoying the hell out of Gaming. Now you tell me that my experience sucks because my card is about 20% slower in Nvidia features. What you are not realizing is AFMF or whatever it is called is going to make your argument moot, when people like me are always getting high FPS in all Games. Even the ones in my library that have no DLSS or Upscaling magic. I once again have to come back to when are we going to give Sapphire kudos for having the first iteration of working upscaling in their Trixx software.

The not sell notion does not hold water when the card has only dropped in price by $100 in price where I live. Don't believe me though just watch Kit Guru's review of the 4070 Super or read any of the TPU reviews of the 4070 Super.

Then we have not even talked about the rest of my system. As much as the 7900X3D gets maligned (AMD did not sample it) it is also the coolest running 5.7 GhZ CPU that happens to have 24 threads. Then I have MP 700 storage as my boot and main Game drive but there is nothing that does not make me smile when I turn on my PC.

My kids are thoroughly enjoying gaming with their RX6600’s that were $240CAD.

 

[kapone32]

My kids are thoroughly enjoying gaming with their RX6600’s that were $240CAD.

My daughter has a 7600 and loves it. I got it for COH3.

 

[gurusmi]

The 7900XT is getting more and more interesting. In grermany the price dropped by 30€ from 849€ down to 819€. And waterblocks are available also. I need that waterblock for my cooling strategy. A 7800XT would be enough GPU power. But there no block is available (yet). My alternatives would be in the professional GPU market. But as i don't use software that certifies the cards i don't see any reason to pay a hell of money.

 

[Minus Infinity]

If the 4070 Ti Super perform better, and sells at the MSRP, then even with this cut will not be enough.

Yep, I agree. Nvidia has better feature set: DLSS2.x is clearly superior to FSR2, RT is usually much better, DLSS3.5 does a great job, NVidia is faster for AI, video encoding etc too. AMD prices need to be 20% lower IMO to be considered a viable alternative. And I own AMD 6800XT. 7800XT looks even worse value now. It needs to drop to $459 and 7700XT $389. I wouldn't buy 7900XT for more than $659. If I upgrade my other PC I'll swap my 2080 Super for the 4070 Ti Super now it has 16GB.

 

[Craptacular]

People can ramble about VRAM all they want but rarely adds to longevity, because GPU is the limiting factor. Just look at 6700XT today. Or 3090 24GB. Any last gen cards with current gen memory amount is much dated, not because of VRAM but because GPU is weak.

That is the point, you don't want to be in a situation where the GPU is powerful enough but it lacks VRAM and so its performance tanks because of it. You always want to have it where the GPU is the limiting factor, not the VRAM.

 

[Minus Infinity]

That is the point, you don't want to be in a situation where the GPU is powerful enough but it lacks VRAM and so its performance tanks because of it. You always want to have it where the GPU is the limiting factor, not the VRAM.

And not every one runs AAA titles at Ultra settings. A 16GB card will be fine for a long time and 16GB is also great for productivity too. More memory helps with AI work in photo processing too.

 

[las]

That is the point, you don't want to be in a situation where the GPU is powerful enough but it lacks VRAM and so its performance tanks because of it. You always want to have it where the GPU is the limiting factor, not the VRAM.

Not really. You can always adjust settings, while retaining most of the IQ, and the faster GPU will push more frames in the end.

It's funny how people think that the PC gaming market is mostly playing AAA games on absolute max settings at 4K/UHD or higher. In reality very very few people cares about this, and the ones that do, often buys high-end stuff anyway. 4090 is the king of 4K+ gaming and this probably won't change before 5090.

In reality 95% of PC gamers use 1440p and the most popular PC games are not even demanding in terms of VRAM. Esport titles and popular multiplayer games in general are made for the masses, and 96% of Steam users have 12GB VRAM or less. Do you think developers code games for the 4%? They want to actually sell games.

Unless you want to push heavy RT or even Path Tracing at 4K/UHD native with Frame Gen on top, pretty much no-one needs more than 8-12GB and won't need it for years. VRAM requirement won't change before next gen consoles hit in 2028, meaning 4 years from now, and by then, every single GPU today is considered mid-end or even low-end at that point. GPU is simply too weak.

The 4070 series competes with the likes of the 7700. You have to be clinically brain-dead to blow $800 on a 12GB card these days. I've already maxed out my RX 6800's 16GB of VRAM in several different scenarios at 1440P.

For people who like bending over for Nvidia, sure!

No you have not. You have allocated that amount. Allocation does not mean required amount. The fact you don't even knows this simple fact, is just sad.

Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora Performance Benchmark Review - 30+ GPUs Tested

Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora features stunning visuals that recreate the movie franchise's unique universe. There's also support for AMD FSR 3 Frame Generation and NVIDIA DLSS. In our performance review, we're taking a closer look at image quality, VRAM usage, and performance on a wide selection...

www.techpowerup.com

12GB cards stomps your RX6800. Even the 3070 8GB is beating your 6800 16GB. Even in 4K minimum fps numbers.

This is an AMD sponsored game on top and a great looking one. 4090 beats 7900XTX by more than 50% at 4K/UHD. In terms of minimum fps, 4090 beats 7900XTX by ~60%

4070 Ti beats 7900XT and easily stomps entire last gen 6800 and 6900 series.

"But but but only 12GB VRAM!!!111" Seems like alot of people on this forum should read about actual VRAM requirement vs allocation.


That said, 6500XT is probably the worst GPU released in this century

I can't speak to all implementations since I haven't built enough AM5 systems, but MSI boards with latest BIOS and Memory Context Restore enabled boot in ~10 seconds with Expo. Leaving it to memory train whenever it wants to leads to crap shoots.

Proof? Because this is one of the biggest gripes about AM5. Former Intel owners are used to lightning fast boot times and AM5 on release were 2+ mins, now we are down to 45-75 sec for most but the majority are still at 30-45sec with newest firmwares + AGESAs, even with MCR and every single of those features enabled.

 

[Beginner Macro Device]

That said, 6500XT is probably the worst GPU released in this century

GTX 1630 can argue about that.

 

[las]

Well since you want to make it personal my PC is faster than yours with no personal opinions inserted so go on. Do you think that all TPU reviewers got free 4000 cards for nothing but good will? By the way Steam is used to play Games not compare hardware.

The reason your argument is so low brow is because AMD made how much money last quarter?

RDNA has been a success. Not the success that Ryzen has been but if you have been on AMD you have FELT the performance improvement. Vega 64 to 5600XT may have been a side grade but 6800XT from that was nice and now 79000XT(The one you love to hate) is the cat's meow. As I said before price is still a mitigating factor so when I looked at the 4090. I set my budget and bought a 7900X3D, 32GB of DDR5 and X670E Strix E with the $1400 I saved not getting the 4090.

Now I started with my PC is better than yours because you have a 9900K. I know you don't have the same venom for Ryzen but Nvidia did not try to buy ARM because they love being a single node maker. Look at the new MSI Claw and see that Intel realizes that the future is not High end Gpus for $2000+ but handheld PCs running capable APUs. Just look at how some are now copying Steam Deck OS. Just to bring it full circle the Steam Deck has been in the top 10 of Global Sales on Steam since launch. I wonder who is in the Steam Deck? Even though the Xbox sells way less no one can deny the sales of the PS5 and who is in that?

Now those products (Windows for now) are going to get a driver update that will make the argument of DLSS 3.5 or whatever moot when Xess and FSR are there. Indeed they better hope that Windows decides to incorporate Nvidia DLSS in Direct X or it might become an afterthought. Maybe not as bad as Physx but definitely Gsync. Oh I forgot AMD did not make that either, but they certainly have made it better. It is actually a button in the Software.

Nah your PC is not faster than mine in terms of maxing out games at 4K/UHD on my QD-OLED TV which is what I mainly do. I get full GPU usage in all games. 9900K at 5.2 GHz is no slouch. How do I know? Because I build tons of machines since. Tried every single high-end CPU in the last 5 years, and most GPUs as well.

7900XT is nowhere near 4090 and CPU means little in 4K gaming, with FG enabled in games like Cyberpunk and Alan Wake 2, CPU is pretty much idling and GPU blasts at full usage every single scene.

When Zen 5 or Arrow Lake hits later this year, about 6-9 months, I will upgrade. No reason to upgrade till true leaps happen and my 9900K at 5.2 GHz performs close to many of the newer CPUs anyway.

4K gaming in demanding AAA games with ultra preset means CPU don't really matter. Enable FG, and CPU don't matter at all. Very simple, just look at GPU usage, and I will know. Its peaking. Minimums might be affected in a few games, but not alot. My 9900K at 5.2 GHz performs better than 11900K and close to 12th gen i5 and i7. Tested myself.

At 1440p my system destroys any game as well, CPU is not holding me back at all. I easily get 200+ fps in shooters, maxing out my 280 Hz monitor.
I will probably go 1440p OLED at 360-480 Hz this year or next, so CPU upgrade will be needed. Looking forward to Zen 5 3D vs Arrow Lake reviews, and I will make my purchase shortly after. Just in time for winter.

See how 7900X3D is not even listed, because of miniscule sales numbers. People are simply going either 7800X3D or 7950X3D. Only 6 cores with 3D cache on the 7900X3D makes people not buy it.

Right now I am playing Avatar and 4090 absolutely wrecks 7900XT -> https://www.techpowerup.com/review/avatar-fop-performance-benchmark/5.html

Your "true 4K without using upscaling" GPU is doing 33 fps average.

+ DLSS/DLAA easily beats FSR in this game too, even tho its AMD sponsored -> https://www.techpowerup.com/review/avatar-frontiers-of-pandora-dlss-2-vs-fsr-3-comparison/

However this is nothing new. DLSS/DLAA beats FSR in pretty much every single game.

 

[theouto]

How can you have a 4090 and still talk like someone with heavy buyers remorse

 

[las]

Oh now I see. We have a new Intel Nvidia brand loyalist in house. This should be fun. I guess since fancucker and fergatos are not commenting much anymore, the universe is trying to provide balance.

I am not a loyalist at all. I probably have more AMD chips in house than most people here. Using Ryzen in 3 diff PCs, NAS, Server and HTPC. However, not impressed with AMDs dGPUs but (most) of their CPUs and APUs are excellent. Also strongly considering Zen 5 (3D) as my next platform for my gaming machine, I want to see Arrow Lake numbers first tho. They will both come in Q4 this year. Maybe even Q3.

Most of the AMD GPU users simply don't know how important good features are and only looks at raster perf, still. Meanwhile most new AAA games uses upscaling and leaves out AA completely, native res gaming is dying fast and DLAA and FSR Native beats native every time. DLAA beats FSR Native tho. FOMO makes people go into denial. Nothing new.

If AMD GPUs were actually truly great and competitive, they would be selling in much bigger numbers and prices would be on par with Nvidia and not lower. This is a telltale sign of AMD being behind. This was to expected tho, since GPUs are not AMDs main business. They don't have the R&D funds to compete with Nvidia here.

You can't expect AMD to be competitive in both CPU and GPU sector. And they never are.

 

[Vya Domus]

Given that the $1000 7900 XTX is going to get rinsed by the $1000 4080 Super

4080 Super has like 5% more shaders lol, "rinsed" yeah OK.

How can you have a 4090 and still talk like someone with heavy buyers remorse

It may have something to do with the fact that the cards used in comparisons are always like 2-3 times cheaper lol.

 

[las]

I'd rather trust Der8auer's testing on the 12VHPWR connector, and the news reports I have seen on connectors melting, rather than people insisting the connector is perfect.
I have also seen plenty of videos of repair technicians replacing melted connectors, I'd rather not take a chance on a ruined GPU over a terrible connector.
And I would rather have 3 8 power connectors, over worrying if I bent the connector too much, just use a case with no side window and you don't have to see any cables inside the case.

You posted a link to a 4070 Super review, it seems like you're confused on what you're even trying to bash AMD on.

I don't buy a GPU based on what is the most popular on the steam survey, I buy based on performance and what I want from the hardware, an AMD card is better performance per dollar and I care more about rasterized performance, if I want to use upscaling AMD doesn't restrict upscaling features away from users like Nvidia did with frame gen on the RTX 3000 series.

You act like half of 4090 have melting connectors So funny. It is good enough that Nvidia keep releasing cards with 12VHPWR, that tells me that RMA is not a problem at all. I know 5 other people with 4090/4080 all using 12VHPWR native connector and they had zero issues.

Upscaling is the future and upscaling is replacing anti aliasing in AAA games. Already a thing in tons of new games. Nvidia did not restrict FG to 4000 series, it was not possible to do on 3000 series because of hardware requirements.

DLSS, DLAA and FG actually works well, because of this dedicated hardware. And this is why AMD is in panic mode trying to get on par with a pure software approach.

AMD likes playing the good guy, but in reality, FSR is often worse than XeSS which is also "free" to use.

 

[Chrispy_]

4080 Super has like 5% more shaders lol, "rinsed" yeah OK.


It may have something to do with the fact that the cards used in comparisons are always like 2-3 times cheaper lol.

5% more shaders, 4% higher clock, 9% expected increase in performance over the 4080, which is already a good match the XTX in raster (the most important metric) and runs absolute circles around the XTX for raytracing even if you willingly ignore DLSS/Frame-gen/power consumption/CUDA etc.

At the moment, the 4080 is faster than the XTX in raster-only titles by about 10% at 1080p, about 10% slower at 4K. The 4080S will basically take those small victories the XTX had over the 4080 and instead take the win in the overwhelming majority of tests. Perhaps "rinsed" is the wrong word, but rather than the tally being 50:50 tests running better on a 4080 than an XTX and them being "evenly matched" with caveats, there will be no caveats with the 4080 Super vs the XTX. Pick any game, pick any resolution, pick any settings, and the 4080 will, at worst, tie with the XTX. That's what I mean by rinsed, even if it's overall only 10% faster overall.

This thread is about the 7900XT though - what really matters is the cost of the nearest-performing Nvidia GPU, and that's going to be the $600 4070S. The 4080S was mentioned only because it will squeeze the Nvidia upper product stack prices down. Factory OC'd 4080's costing $1300-1500 are soon going to be worth $1000 because they'll match a $999 4080S The 4070 Ti S is going to bring 4080-ish performance to the $800 price point, making a $950 XTX look like a raw deal.