It's starting to look like a good price for a midrange GPU. Does this mean that RDNA 4 is just around the corner, though?

It should be priced 349$ at start not now! Right now market share are lost too late AMD. RX 7800 XT was better deal....

Good. It's a fantastic option rivalling a 4060Ti but without the 8GB limitations and at the price the 4060Ti should have been anyway.

Sure, The 4060Ti has DLSS but it lacks the bandwidth to scale up to 4K successfully (I should know, I've had a 16GB version since launch and it sucks at upscaling with bandwidth issues crippling it's ability to upscale to 4K even with performance DLSS. It works, but I'm not getting framerates anywhere close to the 1080p performance that 4K performance DLSS is rendering at internally. There's simply not enough bandwidth on these entry-level 128-bit cards!)

As for raytracing, the 7700XT isn't actually that much slower than the 4060Ti and IMO it's an irrelevant issue at this performance tier because the 4060Ti's raytracing performance isn't good enough to be useful anyway.

Thats a sensible price and actually wont mind if Intel and AMD both just cater to sub $500 market with solid offerings with their next Gen GPUs.

Chrispy_It works, but I'm not getting framerates anywhere close to the 1080p performance that 4K performance DLSS is rendering at internally.

That's the thing with any GPU regardless of VRAM bandwidth, innit? My 6700 XT that has a 1.5 times wider bus also fails to deliver 1080p-alike performance when running 4K + FSR P. I'm talking 90 VS 60 FPS difference. Running DLSS is a complex thing so one should expect a significant performance tax.

Great price for a very good card. It is just that GPUs are still too expensive. If you look at it from this lens though you get 40K 2. That Game is $89.99 for the base version on Steam. Where I live a 7700XT is cheapest for $589 That is $435 US. We need cards back to in $250 Canadian in the market with this kind of performance. Even the 7600XT (not a bad card) is still over $400. Too bad it is not on the regular 7600 as that card is actually $350 but no Games. I guess $400 is the new norm for compelling GPU performance.

The Radeon 7900xt is down to $659.

videocardz.com/newz/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xt-is-now-available-for-659

Cue the ‘it should have always been that price’ comments.

DavenThe Radeon 7900xt is down to $659.

videocardz.com/newz/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xt-is-now-available-for-659

Cue the ‘it should have always been that price’ comments.

This would make the price gap between this and a 4080S about $700 where I live. Is Nvidia worth the price of a 8 TB NMVE or MB/CPU or CPU/RAM combo?

kapone32This would make the price gap between this and a 4080S about $700 where I live. Is Nvidia worth the price of a 8 TB NMVE or MB/CPU or CPU/RAM combo?

Hell no!

DavenCue the ‘it should have always been that price’ comments.

No, 660 is too much for this SKU. It's a mid-high range GPU per se and these historically went for well under 600. Since now it's factually LAST GEN, I see $500 for 7900 XT a valid price tag. Might probably be worth 610ish 2 years ago but today, defo no.

7700 XT sans bonus games for $200 is what this market actually needs.

Beginner Macro DeviceNo, 660 is too much for this SKU. It's a mid-high range GPU per se and these historically went for well under 600. Since now it's factually LAST GEN, I see $500 for 7900 XT a valid price tag. Might probably be worth 610ish 2 years ago but today, defo no.

7700 XT sans bonus games for $200 is what this market actually needs.

The 7900XT is one of the 5 fastest cards in the Space for pure raster. It makes a 6800XT feel like a 6600 like how you card feels against a 6600. The specs are good and it brute forces 4K just fine. Then you refinements like Smart Access memory.

Beginner Macro DeviceNo, 660 is too much for this SKU. It's a mid-high range GPU per se and these historically went for well under 600. Since now it's factually LAST GEN, I see $500 for 7900 XT a valid price tag. Might probably be worth 610ish 2 years ago but today, defo no.

7700 XT sans bonus games for $200 is what this market actually needs.

The 6800XT was $650 at launch. The 7900XT should have been named the 7800XT. So it being worth "$610 two years ago" is nonsense in my view. It realistically should have been a $700 7800XT. AMD played shenangians with the naming scheme to make it look like they were selling the 6900XT successor at a $100 discount. When in actuality they were charging a $250 premium for the 6800XT successor.

KritWait do you bought RTX 4060 Ti 16GB version ? That's one of the worst graphics cards ever released on planet earth. For that price you got basically nothing and RTX 3060 Ti users are laughing and pointing fingers at you. RX 7700 XT wasn't that good at start but RTX 4060 Ti 16GB holy s*it that's an insult by logical thinking.

Laughing at someone's purchased even if it's a bad/gimped product while not even using proper English/grammar is pretty cringe.

LionheartLaughing at someone's purchased even if it's a bad/gimped product while not even using proper English/grammar is pretty cringe.

It is just the narrative again. Being regurgitated by the noise. I got nothing but this for buying a 6500XT during the height of Covid and writing the positives of the card. The 4060TI is fine if you know your use case.

kapone32It makes a 6800XT feel like a 6600

That happened every single gen: a GPU for a similar price shows at least 60 percent more performance. 7900 XT, however, only barely outperformed 6800 XT. +33% speed is nonsensical to be happy about, especially accounting a higher price.

Darc RequiemThe 6800XT was $650 at launch.

And that already was a robbery.

Darc RequiemIt realistically should have been a $700 7800XT.

If we base pricing sanity on the worst generation ever plagued by both COVID, crisis, mining boom, and massive greed then you're probably right.

Darc Requiemthe 6900XT successor at a $100 discount. When in actuality they were charging a $250 premium for the 6800XT successor.

7900 XT is an actual 6800 NON-XT successor and the latter GPU already had been a serious overprice at 580 USD.

Some decent deals over in Europe too.

Beginner Macro DeviceThat happened every single gen: a GPU for a similar price shows at least 60 percent more performance. 7900 XT, however, only barely outperformed 6800 XT. +33% speed is nonsensical to be happy about, especially accounting a higher price.

And that already was a robbery.

If we base pricing sanity on the worst generation ever plagued by both COVID, crisis, mining boom, and massive greed then you're probably right.

7900 XT is an actual 6800 NON-XT successor and the latter GPU already had been a serious overprice at 580 USD.

All of this is opinion. Look at the most recent GPU reviews on TPU. We can wax on about pricing and I agree about Covid but that narrative that the 7900XT should have been a 7800XT is daft to me when the 7800XT is faster than the 6800XT with the same specs.

Yes if you have a 5800X3D you might not feel the difference as much but 7000X3d chips are faster than 5000X3D chips, I promise you there is nothing disappointing about the 7900XT. In fact where I live (Covid) a 6800XT was $1599 at launch so the 7900XT was still $300 less at launch. Now you can get them for under $1000. Most 7800XTs are about $50 more than the 6800XT available to purchase new for $699 where I live. With GPU pricing a $300 gap is actually not bad.

Where it was usually $100 for each gap before. Cards are indeed too expensive for the average hobbyist these days though.

If AMD comes through as rumored and releases up to 7900xt performance well below $500 for RDNA4 then I expect all you price critiques to buy it.

kapone327800XT is faster than the 6800XT with the same specs.

They never had the same specs. 7800 XT is a heavily cut-down RDNA3 GPU, 6800 XT is a less cut-down RDNA2 GPU. Yes, 7800 XT is slightly better overall but it's hard to tell them apart in real usage sans benchmarking/monitoring tools.

kapone327000X3d chips are faster than 5000X3D chips

Not by that much. The CPU point is still moot, we're talking actual GPU performance here.

kapone32but that narrative that the 7900XT should have been a 7800XT is daft to me

Let's put it that way:
2010. GTX 580, 500 USD. 2012. GTX 660 Ti, 300 USD.
2012. GTX 680, 500 USD. 2014. GTX 960, 200 USD.
2014. GTX 980, 550 USD. 2016, GTX 1060. 300 USD.
2016. GTX 1080, 600 USD. 2018, RTX 2060. 350 USD.
2018. RTX 2080, 700 USD. 2020. RTX 3060 Ti, 400* USD.
2020. RTX 3080, 700 USD. 2022. RTX 4070, 600 USD. RX 7800 XT**, 500 USD.

*was unavailable at MSRP before becoming last-gen + had problematic Hynix GDDR6 batches
**never matched NV feature set

Same applies to AMD. We no more get about the same speed for about 40 to 60 percent price when the new gen comes. We only get a new DLSS version and a couple percent discount. And some energy efficiency boost. And arguable power connectors.

This only tells us that AMD are fine with losing market share and they are more than okay with gaming GPUs becoming unobtanium due to it becoming not only de facto but also de jure monopoly. Would've cut their prices in half or presented something that NV GPUs for the life of them can't do years ago otherwise.

PlayStation 5 395 euro for this winter.

Still holding off upgrading my 2060 until I see how the performance and prices of the next gen midrange AMD and Nvidia cards are, tbh.

Too little too late IMO

I own and love the RX 7700 XT. Price drop is very nice. For someone working with Davinci Resolve, the ability to use AV1 is a nice gift from AMD.

KritWait do you bought RTX 4060 Ti 16GB version ? That's one of the worst graphics cards ever released on planet earth. For that price you got basically nothing and RTX 3060 Ti users are laughing and pointing fingers at you. RX 7700 XT wasn't that good at start but RTX 4060 Ti 16GB holy s*it that's an insult for logical thinking enthusiasts.

Bought? No. I can have any hardware I want, no questions asked, as a free perk. The only limitation is that it has to be something we stock, so when Nvidia sample me a few RTX A6000 GPUs for testing or white paper contributions, I can borrow but must return them.

The 4060Ti was picked for performance/Watt and physical size reasons, the abysmal performance/$ was irrelevant to me when I wasn't paying a dime. Obviously I took a 16GB model because the 8GB is plain stupid.

Beginner Macro DeviceThat's the thing with any GPU regardless of VRAM bandwidth, innit? My 6700 XT that has a 1.5 times wider bus also fails to deliver 1080p-alike performance when running 4K + FSR P. I'm talking 90 VS 60 FPS difference. Running DLSS is a complex thing so one should expect a significant performance tax.

Yes, there is a tax to run DLSS, and I've accounted for that. The scaling of DLSS on the 4060Ti falls of a cliff with resolution increases much faster than with other cards that offer similar compute performance like the 6700XT (running FSR) or the 3060Ti that I also tried with that 4K120 TV.

The 3060Ti is a really good reason why I think the bandwidth is the problem because it handles 4K upscaling from a 1080p native render (DLSS performance mode) pretty well. It has a very similar level of performance to the 4060Ti but has nearly twice the bandwidth on slightly slower-clocked VRAM, but a 256-bit bus instead of the 128-bit bus.

In light of no other obvious explanation for why the 3060Ti can upscale to 4K gracefully, and the 4060Ti starts to fall apart even at upscaling to 1440p, I have to assume that the bottleneck is raw bandwidth.

KritWait do you bought RTX 4060 Ti 16GB version ? That's one of the worst graphics cards ever released on planet earth. For that price you got basically nothing and RTX 3060 Ti users are laughing and pointing fingers at you. RX 7700 XT wasn't that good at start but RTX 4060 Ti 16GB holy s*it that's an insult for logical thinking enthusiasts.

LMAO!