Thursday, January 9th 2025
AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT Benchmarked in 3D Mark Time Spy Extreme and Speed Way
Although it has only been a few days since the RDNA 4-based GPUs from Team Red hit the scene, it appears that we have already been granted a first look at the 3D Mark performance of the highest-end Radeon RX 9070 XT GPU, and to be perfectly honest, the scores seemingly live up to our expectations - although with disappointing ray tracing performance. Unsurprisingly, the thread has been erased over at Chiphell, but folks have managed to take screenshots in the nick of time.
The specifics reveal that the Radeon RX 9070 XT will arrive with a massive TBP in the range of 330 watts, as revealed by a FurMark snap, which is substantially higher than the previous estimated numbers. With 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, along with base and boost clocks of 2520 and 3060 MHz, the Radeon RX 9070 XT managed to rake in an impressive 14,591 points in Time Spy Extreme, an around 6,345 points in Speed Way. Needless to say, the drivers are likely far from mature, so it is not outlandish to expect a few more points to get squeezed out of the RDNA 4 GPU.
Regarding the scores we currently have, it appears that the Radeon RX 9070 XT fails to match the Radeon RX 7900 XTX in both the tests, although it easily exceeds the GeForce RTX 4080 Super in the non-ray-traced TS Extreme test. In the Speed Way test, which is a ray-traced benchmark, the RX 9070 XT fails to match the RTX 4080 Super, falling noticeably short. Considering that it costs less than half the price of the RTX 4080 Super, this is no small feat. Interestingly, an admin at Chiphell, commented that those planning on grabbing an RTX 50 card should wait, further hinting that the GPU world has "completely changed". Considering the lack of context, the interpretation of the statement is debatable, but it does seem RDNA 4 might pack impressive price-to-performance that may give mid-range Blackwell a run for its money.
Sources:
Chiphell, @0x22h
The specifics reveal that the Radeon RX 9070 XT will arrive with a massive TBP in the range of 330 watts, as revealed by a FurMark snap, which is substantially higher than the previous estimated numbers. With 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, along with base and boost clocks of 2520 and 3060 MHz, the Radeon RX 9070 XT managed to rake in an impressive 14,591 points in Time Spy Extreme, an around 6,345 points in Speed Way. Needless to say, the drivers are likely far from mature, so it is not outlandish to expect a few more points to get squeezed out of the RDNA 4 GPU.
95 Comments on AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT Benchmarked in 3D Mark Time Spy Extreme and Speed Way
*It’s also confirmed from Paul at Paulshardware that the 9070 retains a 16gb config based on the powercolor product label on one of their two slot designs.
I fully expect both the 9060xt and 9060 to sport 12gb of vram at minimum.
Does any website test GPUs at stock settings with 3DMark and publish scores of GPUs that are representative of what people actually own?
Normal people not running someMark3D every day or at all.
That number is like monopoly money in the cashier...
Mid range Nvidia+AMD card benchmarks numbers would make it a meaningful article.
There's precious little noise about the 9060-series, just rumours and speculation that they are coming in March 2025. Most of the rumours seem to show that Navi 44 powering the 9060 and 9060XT is exactly half of the Navi48 powering the 9070 and 9070XT - that means it's a 128-bit, 8GB card - most likely 2048 cores and cut down to 8 lanes of PCIe too. I would guess that if these rumours are accurate, the 9060XT will be using expensive double-density GDDR6 modules to boost the puny GPU to an acceptable quantity of VRAM, but also boost it's price into a higher, unacceptable price bracket for the performance it offers.
Hopefully the rumours are wrong and we do get a 192-bit 12GB 9060XT, as that's probably what the sub-$300 market needs more than anything else right now. B580 kind of nailed it there!
The 7900XTX even beats the 4080 super while cheaper than the 4070 ti
I sorted for the cheapest on newegg
So yeah, the 4090 is king, but if you shoot lower than the top
AMD is was simply better in 2024.
And also yeah, in some specific games you may do better with the Nvidia, I talked in a general way
And if you would focus on AI stuff, Nvidia might be generally better, but that is not the average usecase
Seems like they really wanted to focus on two points that everybody was complaining about so FSR and RT. Now there is only one thing left, price.
If that makes any difference...
5900X + 7900XTX (TBP 366W, GPU clock 2500~2530MHz, VRAM 2600MHz)
Hair Physics in Unreal Engine - Overview | Unreal Engine 5.5 Documentation | Epic Developer Community
here you can see a video of the tech in action:
Enabling Physics Simulation on Grooms in Unreal Engine | Unreal Engine 5.5 Documentation | Epic Developer Community
AMD is working on a loooot of technologies available for game devs who might not have an equivalent alternative in their engines just yet.
This is what I said:Here's a few examples of the speculation so far:
videocardz.com/newz/amds-next-gen-navi-44-gpu-package-said-to-be-29x29mm-in-size-smaller-than-navi-23-33
wccftech.com/amd-navi-44-package-size-29-x-29-mm-smaller-than-navi-33-bigger-than-navi-24/
www.techspot.com/news/105144-amd-navi-44-rdna-4-gpu-package-size.html
One of the youtubers (might have been one of the Steves) speculated that the package size decrease from Navi 48 was too much for Navi 44 to be a 3072-core/192-bit/12GB config, and that it was even smaller than the 2048/128-bit/8GB config of the RX 7600 and 6600 series. There has been a node shrink, but if Navi 44 is even smaller than Navi 33 or 23, it's "likely to be a 2048 quad-channel solution" (GDDR6 channels are 32-bits wide, so presumably that means a 128-bit card).
Some redditors speculated that Navi48 was just two Navi44 dies glued together but that's been debunked now that we have actual die shots of Navi48.
The real question is if the reference model stays at 265W (that's what all the leakers was saying) or the board power increased in a last time decision by AMD?
Also if this is an OC model then the 3060MHz core speed is factory OC speed or manual OC? (because if you remember back in RX 7900 XTX launch in W1zzard's review of ASUS TUF (also probably ASUS TUF series the leaked RX 9070 XT, but it could be Prime also) the average clock of reference was 2630MHz and the ASUS model could hit 3200MHz with manual OC for a +15% real-world performance increase vs reference...)
But the most important thing is MSRP, with the right price any performance will be acceptable!