Wednesday, January 15th 2025

UK Retailer Inadvertently Posts Radeon RX 9070 XT & 9070 GPU Specs

The majority of AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT GPU-related leaks have emerged thanks to insiders playing around with pre-launch PowerColor RDNA 4 sample models. During and since CES, Team Red and its board partners have kept mum about specifications and performance figures—but happy accidents have allowed tech enthusiasts to pore over NDA-busting information. As reported by VideoCardz yesterday, Overclockers UK (OCUK) published a landing page that provided a brief look at basic Radeon RX 9070 XT and RX 9070 (non-XT) specs—the British retailer has since scrubbed this entry from its site.

Leaks have revealed alleged core counts—4096 for XT, and 3584 for non-XT—but Overclockers UK's charts listed a count of 4096 for both Navi 48 GPUs. They both sport 16 GB GDDR6 VRAM and 256-bit memory buses, and the leak reveals another shared trait: a 260 W TDP rating. VideoCardz reckons that this is an error—based on previous clock speed insider info, the Radeon RX 9070 non-XT's power consumption figure should be rated lower. The accidentally published clock speeds appear to be sourced from overclocked examples—AMD is reportedly not going to release full/finalized information until closer to launch, so OCUK could have relied on preliminary product guides. The FAQ section states that Team Red's RDNA 4 generation is sticking with a PCI-Express 4.0 x16 host interface—PCIe 5.0 systems are "thankfully" backwards compatible. NVIDIA's GeForce RTX 50 series will be leading the way into PCIe 5.0 spec territories.
Sources: VideoCardz, OC UK (now 404-ed)
Add your own comment

11 Comments on UK Retailer Inadvertently Posts Radeon RX 9070 XT & 9070 GPU Specs

#1
Daven
I'm going to go out on a limb and say all the specs were just placeholders with no real idea what the true values will turn out to be.
Posted on Reply
#2
dir_d
DavenI'm going to go out on a limb and say all the specs were just placeholders with no real idea what the true values will turn out to be.
Yeah, why would they put 3x8 pin on a 260W card?
Posted on Reply
#3
DBGT
No way they will have the same TDP.
Posted on Reply
#4
dartuil
I doubt they both 4096 SU.
If they both 4096 , one will be 192 bit and 12gb
Posted on Reply
#5
jfrpm1985
Nobody would buy the 9700XT then. Just a clocks bump?
Posted on Reply
#6
anonuser57
dir_dYeah, why would they put 3x8 pin on a 260W card?
To ensure the user uses two cables and not just the two connectors from the same power cable.
Posted on Reply
#7
TheinsanegamerN
anonuser57To ensure the user uses two cables and not just the two connectors from the same power cable.
Given one 8 pin is capable of driving 300w without melting, that would be supremely stupid engineering by AMD.
Posted on Reply
#8
watzupken
dartuilI doubt they both 4096 SU.
If they both 4096 , one will be 192 bit and 12gb
It won't make sense for both to have the same number of Compute units. 9070 is most likely there because there will be chips that are defective that AMD can sell as a lower end model.
TheinsanegamerNGiven one 8 pin is capable of driving 300w without melting, that would be supremely stupid engineering by AMD.
I think it was reported in the CES that some models will come with 3x 8pin. These are likely those overbuild flagship models which is typically power hungry for little gains. In general, it should be 2x 8pin power connectors. It may be possible to drive 300W on a single 8 pin, but I believe they are putting in buffer because not every PSU and cable are build the same.
Posted on Reply
#9
AusWolf
If it's really just a clock speed bump between the XT and non-XT, then there's no reason to get the XT, imo. Although, I doubt it. I'm going with the placeholder theory here.

Oc UK also lists the 5090 for £25,000 and the 5070 for £7,000, definitely placeholders.
Posted on Reply
#10
zo0lykas
OC.uk are greedy....

Playing scalpers game..

9800x3d on release date was sold for £449, next few weeks they increased price tag for £549..
Now a bit reduced to £529

Its last place i would look for something..
Posted on Reply
#11
anonuser57
TheinsanegamerNGiven one 8 pin is capable of driving 300w without melting, that would be supremely stupid engineering by AMD.
It's not about the cables themselves so much as power rail configurations on the PSU. Some low quality PSUs can have not enough power delivery on a single 12v rail and put one PCIe power cable on one rail and the other cable on the other rail. Card manufacturers don't want naive customers thinking their card is defective because their PSU is rated for enough power but their card still shuts off under load.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Feb 19th, 2025 02:01 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts