I have little hope of the 9070XT disrupting the market at $600+. This might only happen if the 5070Ti sells out instantly, or goes for much more than the $750 MSRP. And even if that happens, buyers will still go for the 5070 at this price point. AMD didn't seem to learn from their previous generations.

Sadly, the vast majority of gamers are already onboard with Nvidia's AI marketing. The $150 difference won't be enough to sway them, even when the two cards offer similar performance and features.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for AMD. I would hate to see the Radeon division throwing in the towel because of the dwindling market share. They don't need to convince Radeon owners that they have a good product. Rather, they have to aggressively promote it to people on older/slower Geforce models. And I'm sure 90%+ of them will choose Nvidia without a hefty monetary incentive.

olymind1Something is not right within AMD's graphics division / RTG nowdays...

yeah, they're letting concerns about short term stock value dictate EVERYTHING. What Radeon really has to do is LITERALLY sell the cards at cost or at a slight loss and ACCEPT the fact that quarterly reports will "disappoint" idiot investors who have no conception of long term planning or strategy and play the long game where short term earnings will have to suffer for long term growth.

It's the short term stock price and "pleasing the investors", a sickness that consumes every company, that us standing in the way of Radeon taking these necessary actions.

DrashI guess their idea of agressive isn't as agressive as mine.

No, I agree. Overpriced by a good $50. Will continue to recommend 7800xt/7900xt/7900xtx (when you can get a fair deal) if these are the prices and xt is 20gbps ram and/or no cache improvements.
I understand there is always the possibility of stuff we don't know (like perhaps they beefed up the cache; for instance how Mark Cerney wants the L1 to take care of up-scaling), and that DOES matter.
I think that's likely a UDNA thing, but would love it if we see something like that here, and/or other ways to sooth bandwidth limitations and/or other things that hamper performance in general use-cases.
If not pure clockspeed, it would explain the die size and low-speed ram. If it is just for clockspeed and not cache, then these products are a ridiculous.

I really did think they might try to hit us with an XTX for $600, but I'll take a swing and guess they'll probably try to undercut the 5070ti at $700 (if it exists).

IOW: $500, $600, $700...which is asking a lot for a couple glorified 7800xt's and a not 20GB less-than-7900xt.

Yeah...I don't like it. As I have said for a bit...Whomever is making these decisions truly doesn't get it.

I once-again will state almost nothing makes sense for RT, so perhaps these win by default of being cheaper versus 5070ti at 1440p raster and better than 5070, which is just a bad product.
Clearly the plan is to get 1080p upscaling good-enough at *some* point by both companies. You can argue nVIDA is there, but you still need 7 engines and an OC for good RT (4080/5080). 5070/N48 = 4?.
With 6 engines you need ~3260mhz, and that's not accounting for up-scaling. This is why had AMD made a 7900xtx replacement (with 24gbps) with 'free' FSR4, it actually could have been a good product.
I'll be looking forward to seeing how FSR4 performs (IQ/perf hit) and/or they say anything about improving it in the future in either respect...because they gotta do both (versus N3x and potentiialy even N48)
5070 remains a horrible product to spend $550+ on because <45TF and 12GB of ram...and I guess they're also banking on that.

What I think it should be: $400, $500, $600 (if they have a XTX).
What it should have been: $450-500/$550-600 with higher clocks and faster RAM on the upper-end model.

The only problem with my thinking in the first regard is that would make the 9070 a very, very, good deal. But as it sits, 7800xt already is and hence these are not. I guess that's why it's being discontinued.

While I understand it could potentially be problematic for margin, I really do think they need to compete with the 5060Ti. People are seriously just "like that", and they need to claw back market/mind-share.
Like-wise, I think they can't price above the 5070 no matter what they do (granted 'real' 5070 price might be ~$600).
They have to compete a tier down imho. I'm not saying this bc I'm a cheap bastard, but bc the honest market reality.
They can't just do it by splitting the product stack more (which is a really stupid idea if that's what they're trying to do). Will conserve judgement until after performance, but...if I'm right...this is bullshit.

I think a 8192sp 9070xt product with 20gbps is just plain ridiculous, but if they were doing THAT (5060ti pricing for 5070 perf, cheaper slightly-better 16GB 5070, matching 5070ti for 5070 pricing) then ok.
There is literally no reason for it to exist versus a 7800xt or even a 9070 vanilla unless they limit the 9070 potential and/or the arch has a better cache (but then why clocks so low?).
If they artificially segment their stack just to drive higher prices I will be PISSED. Because they will fail where they didn't need to, and the stack will be a disorganized mess.
That stuff makes me very unhappy. That is literally what separates them from nvidia (outside the 7800xt). They tried it on the 7900 GRE and the community called fuckin' bullshit on it (GOOD JOB!)
I will scream bloody murder about if they do it again. Because I'm sick of it. Somebody needs to start hacking bios again to remove PL/clock limits to stop this nonsense.

I would be much happier had they split the difference on the 7168/8192sp parts and 20/24gbps; price the 9070 between 5060ti/5070 and 9700xt between 5070/5070ti if they had to do that.
This is like trying to have your cake and eat it too...and while many people are indeed kind of not on top of things, there are enough people whom are. They can't lose those people or they are fucked.

Putting FSR4 (and 8-bit ops) aside for a second, here is the simple math:

(7800xt) 7680sp is limited to ~2900mhz with 20gbps RAM. Most will not clock this high and/or much higher bc of artificial power-limiting. Still good for ~45TF, where 16GB starts to make sense.
(9070) 7168sp is limited ~3100mhz with 20gbps ram, and we know these chips will clock this high bc their previous gen did, including the 7600/7700/7900xtx. The rest PL/clock-limited. 50-series will as well.
(9070xt) 8192 is limited to ~2720mhz if it's actually using all units w/ 20gbps. This, ofc, makes no fucking sense other than utilization of shaders might be lower for some reason or boosted shader cache.
(9700xtx?) 8192 at 24gbps limited to 3264mhz. This product actually makes sense but we don't know if it exists.
(7900xt) 10752 @ 20gbps is limited to 2591mhz. It will overclock to ~2800/21600 making it 60TF and on the edge of needing >16GB, just like the 7800xt is for starting to need 16GB.

IOW, these cards split that difference at least two ways, but potentially more. It's nonsense, especially priced higher. Just buy a 7800xt for cheaper or get better perf from a 7900xt.
Hopefully the community will put pressure on for FSR4 being back-ported in whatever potential way it can...and don't let up that pressure. Bc this is how 'it' starts (exactly what nVIDIA does) if you don't.

As I have said, they should have products that are 7168sp/3100mhz/20gbps and 8192/3264/24gbps. That is a 20% spread, capitalizes well on the process, and isn't screwing people over. $500/600 fine.
This is not what they did. So either 9070 is artificially limited and/or 9070xt needs to have better ram as well as be binned to clock substantially higher...but they could have just done it at stock.
If 9070 is limited, it needs to be cheaper. If 9070xt has 24gbps it should be clocked higher. What they did is absolutely horrible product placement, as I have said it many times.

We obviously have to wait for seeing what arch advancements, such as potentially cache, make wrt previous bottlenecks. That said, if this is like N32 in a lot of ways (and it probably is) the math doesn't lie.

I really am waiting to see what AMD is trying to do here, because I see marketing failure in about 3 different potential ways, at the least.
Does it clock high? If it does, why is it clocked so low and the die so big? Are they trying to 'save' it for another product? That's just a waste of the other two SKUs potential to artifically inflate pricing.
If it's cache (potentially for free FSR and/or excusing the ram), that's cool. The core clocks are still way too low at stock.

I would love to be wrong about this, but I truly am afraid I'm going to have to complain about them just as much as nVIDIA pretty soon...bc no matter which way you slice it this stack is stupid.
Either in (stock) specs, potential performance, and/or price....if not all the above.

rattlehead99Well the 7800xt was the successor of the 6700xt and both costed 480-500$ and that was a few years ago too. On top of that this is a 16GB card, it is using N4P and the die size is bigger than both the 7800xt and 6700xt. The 7800xt was chiplet based too, and it was 500$, so a monolith that's bigger at the same time on a process node that now costs as much as N5 did at launch makes sense to be 600$, but for sure their profit margins are not low.

It means the 9700 XT should cost not more than 499$, but preferably lower than 479$. While the pure 9700 349$.

DenverAt this point AMD just needs to launch it and it will sell out instantly. Anyone who says otherwise doesn't live on the same planet.

The planets are aligned in AMD's favor.

I am afraid it won't sell, but will be DOA.
No buy from me.

alwaysstsWill continue to recommend 7800xt

I would not recommend anyone my powercolor 7800xt hellhound. I do not play in gnu linux. There is barely any acceptable support for that card. The ryzen 7600x graphics is enough for both windows 11 pro and i3wm + x11 + openrc + linux kernel desktop

Game randomly crashes in windows 11. Star wars jedi survivor was bad / a few hours ago frostpunk just crashed which i started as a first time frostpunk player.

Windows 11 pro 24h2 problems - lots of problems. I use windows only for gaming. Radeon 6800 non xt had other issues. 6600xt before these two i barely bothered wiht amd gpu settings in windows 10 pro.

I doubt intel or nvidia is worse as of now.

For the very bad windows 11 pro 24h2 and 23h2 driver quality the powercolor 7800xt hellhound was in my personal view 200€ overpriced. Premium price with only two years warranty. I checked a few days ago how long the warranty is in europe for powercolor graphic cards.

Note: I'm not nvidia or intel guy when i consider my previous bought + sold cpu: 5800x, 3700x, 5800x, 3 3100, 7600x // gpu: 6600 xt / nvidia 960 / 6800 non xt / 7800xt

I really disliked that amd wasted their efforts with that FSR nonsense.

QuietBobI have little hope of the 9070XT disrupting the market at $600+. This might only happen if the 5070Ti sells out instantly, or goes for much more than the $750 MSRP. And even if that happens, buyers will still go for the 5070 at this price point. AMD didn't seem to learn from their previous generations.

Sadly, the vast majority of gamers are already onboard with Nvidia's AI marketing. The $150 difference won't be enough to sway them, even when the two cards offer similar performance and features.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for AMD. I would hate to see the Radeon division throwing in the towel because of the dwindling market share. They don't need to convince Radeon owners that they have a good product. Rather, they have to aggressively promote it to people on older/slower Geforce models. And I'm sure 90%+ of them will choose Nvidia without a hefty monetary incentive.

MSRP for Nvidia cards has been a farce for the last two generations, more so the 5000 series. 5070ti outside of week 1 “discounted” sales that AIBs are being overly charitable about will normalize to 10-15% markup over MSRP shortly after release. We’ve already seen it with the 5080/5090.

Im very curious to see the 9070 non xt at this point. As far as we know the core config is the same as the XT but comes heavily limited in the clock department. If that can be bypassed with flashing to an XT bios, it could make for quite a card.

We’ll know soon enough I guess.

AMD's great opening is in the lower-midrange, where nvidia's value for money is literally nonexistent. They've made too much of a fanfare about cards for the masses, not the classes to leave that segment to whatever intel's doing. Hope the 9060 isn't long coming, because this is exactly where Radeon can shine and build a strong userbase , which is critical for mass adoption of FSR et al.

These rumored prices for 9070/9070 XT have me... nonplussed. Not HUGELY disappointed, and if it comes to choose between a 9070 and a 5070, provided that FSR4 upscaling works well, I'll probably pick the 9070 (don't care about multiframe generation, that crap only works upwards of 60 fps, so it's useless to me as I play at 120Hz). But it's nothing I'm getting excited about, either.

It's the usual AMD crap of undercutting nvidia by 50 bucks - and the more of an affordable segment we reach, the less money we save by going AMD. How is that "a change of strategy" from what AMD has always been doing, completely eludes me.

Some good lower-midrange GPUs at decent pricing , on the other hand (I'm thinking B580-and-upwards level with decent availability), and I'll be lining up for the next radeon.

aggressively doing the same as always, 50 to 100usd less. :D

I'm curious as to what the 9700XT will do. All speculation aside, if the power draw isn't outrageous and the performance is around the 4080 level (not talking about RT, don't give a shit about RT or FG or DLSS/FSR/XeSS) I may get one.

However, I'm not paying for a card that runs high idle power draw for multimonitor (which AMD seems to suffer from) nor if it still draws 300W+ for gaming. I've already got a 3080Ti that runs 300W+ when gaming, but at least has a fairly low multimonitor power draw compared to AMD's current offerings.

_roman_I would not recommend anyone my powercolor 7800xt hellhound. I do not play in gnu linux. There is barely any acceptable support for that card. The ryzen 7600x graphics is enough for both windows 11 pro and i3wm + x11 + openrc + linux kernel desktop

Game randomly crashes in windows 11. Star wars jedi survivor was bad / a few hours ago frostpunk just crashed which i started as a first time frostpunk player.

Windows 11 pro 24h2 problems - lots of problems. I use windows only for gaming. Radeon 6800 non xt had other issues. 6600xt before these two i barely bothered wiht amd gpu settings in windows 10 pro.

I doubt intel or nvidia is worse as of now.

For the very bad windows 11 pro 24h2 and 23h2 driver quality the powercolor 7800xt hellhound was in my personal view 200€ overpriced. Premium price with only two years warranty. I checked a few days ago how long the warranty is in europe for powercolor graphic cards.

Note: I'm not nvidia or intel guy when i consider my previous bought + sold cpu: 5800x, 3700x, 5800x, 3 3100, 7600x // gpu: 6600 xt / nvidia 960 / 6800 non xt / 7800xt

I would never touch a powercolor, after both my powercolor vega 64s burned out their own PCBs.

Not sure what you are talking about support wise...drivers are not brand dependant and AMD's support via MESA is second to none.

_roman_I really disliked that amd wasted their efforts with that FSR nonsense.

Look at what nvidia is pulling off with DLSS4. That's why. AMD will need an answer to it, sooner or later.

chstamosAMD's great opening is in the lower-midrange, where nvidia's value for money is literally nonexistent. They've made too much of a fanfare about cards for the masses, not the classes to leave that segment to whatever intel's doing. Hope the 9060 isn't long coming, because this is exactly where Radeon can shine and build a strong userbase , which is critical for mass adoption of FSR et al.

These rumored prices for 9070/9070 XT have me... nonplussed. Not HUGELY disappointed, and if it comes to choose between a 9070 and a 5070, provided that FSR4 upscaling works well, I'll probably pick the 9070 (don't care about multiframe generation, that crap only works upwards of 60 fps, so it's useless to me as I play at 120Hz). But it's nothing I'm getting excited about, either.

It's the usual AMD crap of undercutting nvidia by 50 bucks - and the more of an affordable segment we reach, the less money we save by going AMD. How is that "a change of strategy" from what AMD has always been doing, completely eludes me.

Some good lower-midrange GPUs at decent pricing , on the other hand (I'm thinking B580-and-upwards level with decent availability), and I'll be lining up for the next radeon.

I think B580 really screwed N44. JMO.

16GB would be (relatively) too expensive, and 8GB would be a piece of poo. I mean, this clearly shows with the pricing (obviously it would be $300 if 9070xt $600) of N48.

I mean, stop and think about it for a second. If Intel released a relative 16GB card at $400, it would probably perform like a 7800xt.

AMD has to price themselves similarly to Intel. Not just because of nVIDIA, but now also Intel. This is why 9070 should be $400. If they can't swing $400 on N48, they should just discount 7800xt.

Better than I expected, on the pricing front. If Nvidia's supply woes continue, and if AMD has indeed used the ~2 month delay to build up a hefty stock, then they might really do some damage. And of course, the cards have to perform competitively.

Here's hoping.

QuicksBut we all agree Nvidia need a swift kick in the balls, for that we need AMD to succeed.

Actually, no, we don't really need AMD anymore. There's Intel and their hypothetical B770 now.

Not that this card would be sustainable for Intel, if they're also going to sell it at a loss, but at least there's room for some psychological kick in the nuts.

RX 6800 520mm^2 60CU $579

RX 7800 XT 346mm^2 60CU $499

RX 6700 XT 335mm^2 40CU $479

RX 5700 XT 251mm^2 40CU $399

RX 7900 GRE 529mm^2 80CU $549

Being built on TSMC 4N, if it can stay in the 350mm^2 range, maybe we can get a 9070 XT for $499. :D

mrnagantBeing built on TSMC 4N, if it can stay in the 350mm^2 range, maybe we can get a 9070 XT for $499. :D

Brian from Tech Yes City made a video about, you two are obviously delusional, that will never happen

What's even the point in drawing all these comparisons?

The 5070 Ti won't have stock or will be available at MSRP.

ThomasKWhat's even the point in drawing all these comparisons?

The 5070 Ti won't have stock or will be available at MSRP.

so your point is they can price it whatever they like because there is no other cards?
i'm sure that will end with their market share skyrocketing... to zero

mrnagantRX 6800 520mm^2 60CU $579

RX 7800 XT 346mm^2 60CU $499

RX 6700 XT 335mm^2 40CU $479

RX 5700 XT 251mm^2 40CU $399

RX 7900 GRE 529mm^2 80CU $549

Being built on TSMC 4N, if it can stay in the 350mm^2 range, maybe we can get a 9070 XT for $499. :D

It's ~390, but you're still not wrong (that it should be that way).

Reason is because cache/mc on 4nm should shrink a good 20% or more, as it was based on 7nm. Think of 7800xt as around 350mm if one die on 5nm, a similar design with 8192 350mm2 on 4nm.
But 4nm clocks 11% higher, so they buffed up the die space to factor that...Math comes out pretty exact.

7700 clocked to ~3113mhz (limited in bios?). 3113mhz*1.11 = ~3460mhz, just like Apple's A16.
7900xtx was usually around ~3165-3200mhz, similar to the M1. So if that's the (real) potential of N32 (7700/7800xt), then the potential of this could be similar to to the M2.

Like I said, don't go 'expecting' this to be able to do 3700mhz, but I would expect ~3500mhz. If it gets to 3.6, 3.7, or more, well...that's cool.

Edit: I'm trying to be nice.

3valatzyIt means the 9700 XT should cost not more than 499$, but preferably lower than 479$. While the pure 9700 349$.



I am afraid it won't sell, but will be DOA.
No buy from me.

The XTX stock disappeared, with prices exceeding $900.

I'll bet anything that if it outperforms the 7900XT and is priced at $600, it'll outsell any dGPU AMD has released in the past five years.
9070/9070XT is on track to be faster than the competition in everything, including RT. It's insane not to see the obvious: Nvidia has nothing to offer but fake frames, incendiary cards, poor availability, overpriced products above MSRP.

mrnagantRX 6800 520mm^2 60CU $579

RX 7800 XT 346mm^2 60CU $499

RX 6700 XT 335mm^2 40CU $479

RX 5700 XT 251mm^2 40CU $399

RX 7900 GRE 529mm^2 80CU $549

Being built on TSMC 4N, if it can stay in the 350mm^2 range, maybe we can get a 9070 XT for $499. :D

*RX 7800 XT 200mm² 60CU $499
* RX 7900 GRE 304mm² (defective die in limited quantity)

Bomby569so your point is they can price it whatever they like because there is no other cards?
i'm sure that will end with their market share skyrocketing... to zero

Those are your words, not mine.

Denver9070/9070XT is on track to be faster than the competition in everything, including RT.

"On track" according to rumours, yeah okay kid.

All I care abut is stock. I'm turning against Nvidia for their stock policy which raises prices. If AMD provides large amounts of cards on day one, the MSRP will be respected, and so will be the customers. What a good feeling this must be, it's been a while on the video cards segment.

Assimilator"On track" according to rumours, yeah okay kid.

The 5080 garbage, how close do you think the 5070ti do you think is going to be to the 5080 with 12gb?

DenverThe XTX stock disappeared, with prices exceeding $900.

I'll bet anything that if it outperforms the 7900XT and is priced at $600, it'll outsell any dGPU AMD has released in the past five years.
9070/9070XT is on track to be faster than the competition in everything, including RT. It's insane not to see the obvious: Nvidia has nothing to offer but fake frames, incendiary cards, poor availability, overpriced products above MSRP.



*RX 7800 XT 200mm² 60CU $499
* RX 7900 GRE 304mm² (defective die in limited quantity)

Because of deepseek and/or people realizing high-priced 16GB cards are a bad deal; people that want native 4k (non-rt) and realized this was the only way to get it for less than a 4090.

At 2551mhz or 2800mhz against 7900xt? Because it probably will overclock to meet a 7900xt at stock. It will not have better absolute performance outside whatever instances are newly inherent to the arch.
XTX (if there is one) will likely meet it in absolute performance...but lack 4GB of RAM.

I suppose if you use stock (and segmentation that is purely marketing rather than engineering intent) what you're saying could be true. I don't.

Only way you think $600 for something a 7800xt *could do* if not PL or a 7900xt can do stock with 4GB more ram (for a similar $) is a good deal is solely if you think in terms of against nVIDIA's awful pricing.

People give AMD's RT such crap, but if they actually overclocked it they'd realize it truly isn't bad at all.
7900xt has 6 engines, just like 7900xtx. 4070ti super/5070ti has 6, 4070s/ti 5.
7800/4070/5070/N48 probably all 4.
The joke about them all is none of them are really good-enough to play Hogwarts on high at 1080p.

'Being Agressive' doing the same old is being aggressive? I mean, I'm not really bothered by it but it's disappointing. I like the 9070XT's price personally (assuming of course, it'll be *at* that price), but the 9070 is pretty disappointing. Undercutting competition on price only does so much, especially by that little for the 9070.