Tuesday, March 11th 2025
AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT Reportedly Outperforms RTX 5080 Through Undervolting
AMD's Radeon RX 9070 XT is demonstrating unexpected performance gains through aggressive undervolting, with overclocking specialists documenting significant improvements that push the GPU past NVIDIA's pricier GeForce RTX 5080 in specific benchmarks. Recent tests by Der8auer using a PowerColor Red Devil RX 9070 XT revealed a 10% frame rate increase in Cyberpunk 2077 at 4K Ultra settings by applying a -170 mV voltage offset while increasing the power target to 110%. This modification enabled the GPU to reach clock speeds of 3.36 GHz, compared to 2.90 GHz at stock settings, resulting in 66 FPS versus the RTX 5080's 65 FPS in identical testing environments. The undervolting phenomenon appears consistent across the product line, with YouTuber Alva Jonathan achieving similar 10% performance improvements on the standard RX 9070 using ASRock's Steel Legend model.
Both testers discovered that traditional core clock overclocking yielded negligible results, suggesting these factory-overclocked cards are already operating near their architectural limits. The voltage-frequency curve adjustments effectively lower the voltage required for higher frequencies. Memory overclocking proved counterproductive, with error correction mechanisms actually reducing in-game performance when pushed beyond stable parameters. These results come with important caveats—both tested units are premium variants with enhanced power delivery and cooling solutions that sell significantly above AMD's MSRP. The PowerColor Red Devil commanded a $200 premium over the RX 9070 XT's $599 launch price, while the ASRock Steel Legend carried a $90 markup over the RX 9070's base $550 MSRP. Even with these premiums, however, the high-end RX 9070 XT models remain approximately $200 less expensive than NVIDIA's RTX 5080 while delivering comparable rasterization performance after optimization, despite NVIDIA's ongoing advantages in ray tracing capabilities and software ecosystem.
Source:
via Tom's Hardware
Both testers discovered that traditional core clock overclocking yielded negligible results, suggesting these factory-overclocked cards are already operating near their architectural limits. The voltage-frequency curve adjustments effectively lower the voltage required for higher frequencies. Memory overclocking proved counterproductive, with error correction mechanisms actually reducing in-game performance when pushed beyond stable parameters. These results come with important caveats—both tested units are premium variants with enhanced power delivery and cooling solutions that sell significantly above AMD's MSRP. The PowerColor Red Devil commanded a $200 premium over the RX 9070 XT's $599 launch price, while the ASRock Steel Legend carried a $90 markup over the RX 9070's base $550 MSRP. Even with these premiums, however, the high-end RX 9070 XT models remain approximately $200 less expensive than NVIDIA's RTX 5080 while delivering comparable rasterization performance after optimization, despite NVIDIA's ongoing advantages in ray tracing capabilities and software ecosystem.
51 Comments on AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT Reportedly Outperforms RTX 5080 Through Undervolting
I wonder if a Watercooled TEC, Chilled Water, or an Active Heat Pump could allow the 'meager' Navi 48 to clock and compete well outside its weightclass?
NGL, a part of me wants to see the RTX memes made real, but in Navi 48.
Just like overclocking, undervolting is far from a guarantee. These chips are tuned to maximize usable dies at a certain point on the v/f curve. There are undoubtedly going to be a lot of chips out there that start having issues with even minor reductions in voltage. Ofc better binned chips are going to be able to operate at a higher clock with less voltage, but not all of them.
Another thing to keep in mind is that the chip might be stable in games x/y/z and then completely crash and burn in games a/b/c. Stability isn't a constant and different workloads will stress different components of a chip and they might not all always be stable with an undervolt.
For example: I can 'push' my 7900 XTX to clock to 3.1Ghz+, fairly easy. It may even play a given game or stress test for hours without issue. BUT, one alt-tab out, a new overlay onscreen, or just closing the game, and the card crashes (as its trying to rapidly change clock/voltage states).
There's good reason AMD's cards are 'overvolted' out of the box.
It's the only way *currently* to guarantee a card is stable across all the dynamic points in the Power/Heat/Clock curve(s). Consequently, it *appears* that there's a lot of headroom when there really isn't.
UV and increase power limit, clocks go up.
Problem is that in case of Radeons it's far harder to determine stability.
And there are heaps of people claiming at least for 7900XTX that they run at 1050mv or lower no issues, because they have run 3dmark for an 1 hour and played two games.
I could run 3d mark stress tests for hours on end on my 7900XTX when I had it and it would be stable then you open up Witcher 3 cast Aard by the water couple of times and boom crash.
Very random and unpredictable. Sometimes I wonder if people that are complaining that their system is not stable with Radeons are simply pushing them too far.
Because they get a notion that getting big OC is normal on them and they "stress" tested them so nah it couldnt be it.
In case of my 5080 once I pushed the clock 15MHz too high crashes would happen all the time and it's far easier to determine what is the limit.
Just like some 5080's are tickling a 4090's undercarriage with tuning.
It’s the same for my RX 7600. I can get it over 3GHz in Forbidden West, but Hogwarts Legacy is a crash fest.
Then the people who bought it will be crying because they saw that it is safe to do
Infineon, Micron and Samsung have been my favorites, in that order.>UDNA time
>AMD just casually ships a 32GB GDDR7 screamer
>Calls it the RX 9080XT
>"But Lisa, why the weird name?"
>"Well we were just thinking of our competition and a fun way to send them to the funny farm. 90 class in raster, 80 class in RT..."
It's fascinating how RDNA4, a refresh of the previous gen, turned out to be quite the banger. I guess part of it is going back to the tried-and-tested monolithic design? I do hope they continue to explore chiplets for UDNA though.
Mainly because 33% more ROPs than 7800 XT, and not very surprising 33% more performance.
Save your money for UDNA if I were him. due to the N3 shrink. that's 50% more shaders in the same area.
And more precisely, if the 128 CU theoretical flagship would have been 529mm2, it shrinks to 400mm2 just perfectly.
Undervolting damaging a GPU would be a first. It's overvolting that damages things.