AMD Announces the $999 Radeon RX 7900 XTX and $899 RX 7900 XT, 5nm RDNA3, DisplayPort 2.1, FSR 3.0 FluidMotion

[wheresmycar]

Might as well grab a 6800XT for 550usd now if you don't care about RT, upscaling, video encoding, etc...

6800 XT doesn't cut it for me.... i prefer a wider performance gap over my existing card for a couple of graphically intense games which im invested in (1440/144). The 7800** sounds like a plan for a devised ~$800 budget but unfortunately it wasn't announced for release which sucks. Anyway, it looks like the GPU upgrade plan of action has shifted from 2022 to 2023. Actually i'm kinda proud of myself too... finally drew a line by setting a budget with realistically meaningful performance targets in mind.

 

[mahoney]

So AMD confirmed. The 7900xtx is a 4080 competitor that's why they didn't show the benchmarks

[Radeon RX 7900 XTX] is designed to go against 4080 and we don’t have benchmarks numbers on 4080. That’s the primary reason why you didnt see any NVIDIA compares. […] $999 card is not a 4090 competitor, which costs 60% more, this is a 4080 competitor.
— Frank Azor to PCWorld

 

[ARF]

Might as well grab a 6800XT for 550usd now if you don't care about RT, upscaling, video encoding, etc...

That's too much carelessness. No!

RX 6800 XT is a very old card which now supports only old standards and it's not worth it.

So AMD confirmed. The 7900xtx is a 4080 competitor that's why they didn't show the benchmarks

Frank Azor doesn't know what he is talking about. Fake news, speculations and nonsense.

Frank, how do you design something with something else in mind which you don't even know what it will be?

 

[Minxie]

RX 6800 XT is a very old card which now supports only old standards and it's not worth it.

Two years is very old to you people? Old standards? Lmfao ok. I couldn't be any more happier with my 6900 XT I got at literally 550 eur but sure enjoy your RT gimmicks

 

[tvshacker]

On the price "wars"/forcing Nvidia to lower prices, my opinion is that Nvidia will stay put until they learn about available stock. If AMD doesn't manage to put out enough cards out there, people/bots/scalpers will quickly deplete 7900s stocks, and once that happens, the rest will probably go back to buying 4080s at 1200$ again and Nvidia will get to keep their margins for longer. I believe we've seen AMD drop the ball in the supply chain department it in the recent past to make this a (very) plausible scenario.
Don't get me wrong I wish AMD all the best. This round they seem to have great perf/$ AND perf/watt, but a couple years back I had to replace the old monitor and got a G-Sync one, so I'm kinda stuck on team green, so if they're "bullied" into reducing prices I'm all in! It's insane that a 3070 nearly TWO YEARS after launch still costs over 600€.

 

[z1n0x]

Intel and Nvidia showed AMD that it's still the budget brand. Lisa Su's claim of premium high-performance, high margin products, doesn't hold up in reality. After Zen4, RDNA3 is Another Major Disappointment. You were supposed to close the RT gap, not further fall behind.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Not real impressed with this release. Specs seem weak even vs RDNA2.

Despite all the talk about 7900XT vs 4090, AMDs midrange looks to have been eviscerated and only the 7900XT + seem to show upgrades, on paper anyway.

Maybe the numbers aren't giving a clear indicator of performance, but I wouldn't bet on it.

i.e. this - just looks lame to me. Same thing with the 7700 XT vs 6700 XT, they actually went from a 192 bit bus to a 128 bit bus.

The upgrade seems to start with the 7900XT, lower end looks like downgrades :

 

[Count Shagula]

So if you have a 7900X cpu and a 7900XT gpu can you truthfully say your running dual 7900 gpus because the cpu has a built in gpu too?

 

[Diecast]

Where is the 4GHz potential indication?
2.3GHz game clock for RX7900XTX and 2.0GHz game clock for RX7900XT on 5nm vs 2.61GHz game clock for RX6500XT on 6nm and 2.5GHz game clock for RX6750XT on 7nm.
It seems unlikely the RX 7900XTX on air highly OC models to be capable to hit more than 3GHz/2.8GHz regarding fronted/shader clocks.
Up to 1.7X vs 6950X at 4K and up to 1.6X vs 6950X with raytracing doesn't mean 1.7X on average and probably doesn't even mean 1.6X either for average 4K raster difference.
(Probably can be 1.6X with specific game testbed selection and CPU, but not on current TPU 5800X games testbed)
RX7900XT will be slower than RTX 4090 in 4K but at $999 it doesn't matter, great value (relatively speaking).
A little bit less value for 7900XT since the difference should be around 15% between them.
They will pressure price-wise the higher Ampere lineup for sure and all the cards from Nvidia & AMD will drop a little gradually but it will affect less and less as you go down to the lower priced models till it won't have an effect anymore.

They only once ever mentioned 4GHz and that was possible with "Exotic Cooling". AMD also confirmed that the 7900 cards could reach 3GHz. Also AMD Unlike NVidia who pushed their cards to the very breaking point leaving at best 2% to 3% max OC room AMD went with keeping the levels sane but because of this they should have 10%-20% OC room.

For those that didn't see it these "performance numbers" were with the RX 7900 XTX only running at 300 Watts no where near it's 355TDP. expect higher clocks and better performance at 355. Why would they do that you ask? Simple AMD wanted you to focus on performance per watt upgrade and rightfully so and this was probably the best PEAK PPW area so the cherry picked it and thats almost 100% why they didn't show FPS. Thats the big improvement you see almost every year and speaks loud and clear. To many of you just don't remember because you are to young to remember lol. NVidia fans would bash ATi/AMD because of their Power hog cards that weren't when compared to what we see now from NVidia. 125W X1950XTX ( space heater Power hog screams from Nvidia fans ) Whats the 4090 pull again? oh thats right 450+ Watts, so about the same as a small window AC unit. Think about that for a minute! Those things can cost you over $100 a month to run if they are running 8+ hours a day. The 4090 pulls 12 kWh A DAY... WOW in most places thats $0.25 ( a quarter ) per Hour that you play games. I play 20 games a hour a week some times more that would be $5-$7.50+ a week in electricity $260-$390 a year!

CPU's and GPU's power draws are getting down right stupid! For those in the USA you do know that the average power cost is going to be raised about 70% right because of inflation and the rising cost of power with the removal of the gasoline surplus? Or did you all miss that also?

Not real impressed with this release. Specs seem weak even vs RDNA2.

Despite all the talk about 7900XT vs 4090, AMDs midrange looks to have been eviscerated and only the 7900XT + seem to show upgrades, on paper anyway.

Maybe the numbers aren't giving a clear indicator of performance, but I wouldn't bet on it.

i.e. this - just looks lame to me. Same thing with the 7700 XT vs 6700 XT, they actually went from a 192 bit bus to a 128 bit bus.

The upgrade seems to start with the 7900XT, lower end looks like downgrades :

View attachment 268618

View attachment 268619

those AMD RX 7800 XT specs are place holders and is from techpowerup and it SAYS BELOW where you trimmed it out PLACE HOLDER. That's everything not just the drawn picture of a GPU lmao

 

[birdie]

This is assuming that nvidia dictates the prices and there is no free market influence from the competition and the customers who both have an interest to lower the prices, because obviously no one buys RTX 4090 for that insane abnormally high pricing.

RTX 4090 is literally a garbage card.
- low DP 1.4 support
- ultra heavy - can cause breakages in one's case
- hot
- power hungry
- super ultra expensive
- wrong software - no proper modern user interface, lock-in the users to log-in in order to use some more functionality
- EVGA that held 40% of the US market for nvidia cards said no and left the partnership with nvidia
- low quality power connector which burns and causes electrical issues
- something else that I missed?

- HDMI 2.1 is still there. No DP 2.1 monitors on the market just yet. Will be released in 2023 at the earliest. DSC is still there with zero visible visual difference.
- Such heavy GPUs have existed before. I've not heard of any mass-reports about any issues related to its weight.
- It's not. The FE edition runs around 67C.
- Capped to ~315W (70% of TDP) it loses less than 5% of performance.
- The 90 series cards have always been super expensive. They are not for the average gamer.
- I don't give a .... about its UI. It works. At the same time I get lost in AMD's UI. Which tab do I need? Which place the option I'm looking for? Where's digital vibrance? People have been asking AMD for years for this option. Competive CSGO players do not touch AMD cards because of that.
- EVGA, what? Who the .... cares? 95% of the world have never seen EVGA cards.
- Out of literally tens of thousands of sold cards, fewer than a few dozen people have reported issues. And it looks likely all of them have done something wrong, including bending the cable too much or not properly inserting the adapter. Again, a card for the rich or professionals.

Literally not a single argument.

It's a free market. AMD is all yours. Remember Radeon 9800. Should I remind you about its release price? It was $400. Corporations are not your friend even though you want to love AMD so much.

 

[ARF]

So AMD confirmed. The 7900xtx is a 4080 competitor

Then when will AMD release an RTX 4090 competitor?

Two years is very old to you people? Old standards?

Normally 2 years are 2 generations. I think the RX 6000 are not bad GFX but it's not worth it to buy them 2 years after their release when they will be bettered in every way by the GFX to be launched in only 35 days.

 

[btk2k2]

Not real impressed with this release. Specs seem weak even vs RDNA2.

Despite all the talk about 7900XT vs 4090, AMDs midrange looks to have been eviscerated and only the 7900XT + seem to show upgrades, on paper anyway.

Maybe the numbers aren't giving a clear indicator of performance, but I wouldn't bet on it.

i.e. this - just looks lame to me. Same thing with the 7700 XT vs 6700 XT, they actually went from a 192 bit bus to a 128 bit bus.

The upgrade seems to start with the 7900XT, lower end looks like downgrades :

View attachment 268618

View attachment 268619

That looks more like 7700XT spec.

There will be a 4MCD N32 part for the 7800XT with a 256 bit bus and 7.6k shaders.

The 192 bit 12GB is 7700XT.

Performance extrapolation for 7800XT is probably between 4080 12G and 4080 16G raster perf so maybe 3090Ti to 3090Ti + 10%.

Interesting thing here though is that unlike 7900XTX vs 4090 where the former has 96 RT cores and the latter 128 RT cores the 7800XT will have 60 RT cores as will the part formally known as the 4080 12G so there may be a smaller RT delta at this tier than there is between the 4090 and the 7900XTX.

 

[AusWolf]

RTX 4090 is literally a garbage card.

You know that, and I know that, but do the blind fans who want the fastest of the fastest every year at all costs know that?

The way I see it is that Nvidia is slowly separating itself from normal GPU market conditions, and is trying to establish itself as a niche brand, like Rolls Royce - a brand that people don't buy for its usefulness, but more as a status symbol and luxury item. AMD is trying to grow out of their shadow and form an identity that is not "the little ugly brother of Nvidia", but something that is their own, and I think they demonstrated that well in this launch presentation by establishing the 7900 series as a more efficient, normal size, and more affordable product - a buy that makes more sense (and by not mentioning Nvidia). For years, AMD's message was "we're not that far from Nvidia, please buy our products". Now the message is more like "we don't give a damn about Nvidia anymore - we go our separate path", which is what I was happy to see.

 

[ARF]

You know that, and I know that, but do the blind fans who want the fastest of the fastest every year at all costs know that?

The way I see it is that Nvidia is slowly separating itself from normal GPU market conditions, and is trying to establish itself as a niche brand, like Rolls Royce - a brand that people don't buy for its usefulness, but more as a status symbol and luxury item. AMD is trying to grow out of their shadow and form an identity that is not "the little ugly brother of Nvidia", but something that is their own, and I think they demonstrated that well in this launch presentation by establishing the 7900 series as a more efficient, normal size, and more affordable product - a buy that makes more sense (and by not mentioning Nvidia). For years, AMD's message was "we're not that far from Nvidia, please buy our products". Now the message is more like "we don't give a damn about Nvidia anymore - we go our separate path", which is what I was happy to see.

Yes, what AMD needs is to step with its both feet on the ground. Just name the stupid cards with sane names, drop the "9" digit which screams halo and not for everyone, and thing would be fine.
Just name the "RX 7900 XTX 24 GB" as Radeon RX 7800 XT and call it a day.

 

[Denver]

Not real impressed with this release. Specs seem weak even vs RDNA2.

Despite all the talk about 7900XT vs 4090, AMDs midrange looks to have been eviscerated and only the 7900XT + seem to show upgrades, on paper anyway.

Maybe the numbers aren't giving a clear indicator of performance, but I wouldn't bet on it.

i.e. this - just looks lame to me. Same thing with the 7700 XT vs 6700 XT, they actually went from a 192 bit bus to a 128 bit bus.

The upgrade seems to start with the 7900XT, lower end looks like downgrades :

View attachment 268618

View attachment 268619

It seems rash to say this, even more based on unconfirmed specs.

 

[Zach_01]

Not real impressed with this release. Specs seem weak even vs RDNA2.

Despite all the talk about 7900XT vs 4090, AMDs midrange looks to have been eviscerated and only the 7900XT + seem to show upgrades, on paper anyway.

Maybe the numbers aren't giving a clear indicator of performance, but I wouldn't bet on it.

i.e. this - just looks lame to me. Same thing with the 7700 XT vs 6700 XT, they actually went from a 192 bit bus to a 128 bit bus.

The upgrade seems to start with the 7900XT, lower end looks like downgrades :

View attachment 268618

View attachment 268619

Dont be too attached to these numbers.
You should already know by now that infinity cache is a game changer and that is in fact a multiplication of the (traditional) bit bus.

Nice try...(?)

 

[medi01]

Lisa Su's claim of premium high-performance, high margin products, doesn't hold up in reality

Yeah. As seen by AMD at the moment having higher margins, than NV... (and than Intel too? Ain't that? Not bad for "cheap brand" )

Not real impressed

"It is faster, but specs are bad"

PS

More estimates, based on AMD claims of 1.5-1.7 faster than 6950XT

Cyberpunk 2077 (4K)
RTX 4090: 71.2 FPS
7900 XTX: 66.3 FPS

Watch Dogs: Legion (4K)
RTX 4090: 105.2 FPS
7900 XTX: 95.8 FPS

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (4K)
RTX 4090: 108 FPS
7900 XTX: 139 FPS

God of War (4K)
RTX 4090: 130.2 FPS
7900 XTX: 98 FPS

Red Dead Redemption 2 (4K)
RTX 4090: 104.2 FPS
7900 XTX: 93 FPS

Assassin's Creed Valhalla (4K)
RTX 4090: 106 FPS
7900 XTX: 109 FPS

Resident Evil Village (4K, Ray Tracing)
RTX 4090: 175 FPS
7900 XTX: 138 FPS

 

[AusWolf]

Yeah. As seen by AMD at the moment having higher margins, than NV... (and than Intel too? Ain't that? Not bad for "cheap brand" )


"It is faster, but specs are bad"

PS

More estimates, based on AMD claims of 1.5-1.7 faster than 6950XT

Cyberpunk 2077 (4K)
RTX 4090: 71.2 FPS
7900 XTX: 66.3 FPS

Watch Dogs: Legion (4K)
RTX 4090: 105.2 FPS
7900 XTX: 95.8 FPS

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (4K)
RTX 4090: 108 FPS
7900 XTX: 139 FPS

God of War (4K)
RTX 4090: 130.2 FPS
7900 XTX: 98 FPS

Red Dead Redemption 2 (4K)
RTX 4090: 104.2 FPS
7900 XTX: 93 FPS

Assassin's Creed Valhalla (4K)
RTX 4090: 106 FPS
7900 XTX: 109 FPS

Resident Evil Village (4K, Ray Tracing)
RTX 4090: 175 FPS
7900 XTX: 138 FPS

Are you saying that AMD's $999 graphics card is shit because it's slightly behind Nvidia's $1600 one? Or are you refuting the original "not impressed" comment?

 

[mahoney]

Yeah. As seen by AMD at the moment having higher margins, than NV... (and than Intel too? Ain't that? Not bad for "cheap brand" )


"It is faster, but specs are bad"

PS

More estimates, based on AMD claims of 1.5-1.7 faster than 6950XT

Cyberpunk 2077 (4K)
RTX 4090: 71.2 FPS
7900 XTX: 66.3 FPS

Watch Dogs: Legion (4K)
RTX 4090: 105.2 FPS
7900 XTX: 95.8 FPS

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (4K)
RTX 4090: 108 FPS
7900 XTX: 139 FPS

God of War (4K)
RTX 4090: 130.2 FPS
7900 XTX: 98 FPS

Red Dead Redemption 2 (4K)
RTX 4090: 104.2 FPS
7900 XTX: 93 FPS

Assassin's Creed Valhalla (4K)
RTX 4090: 106 FPS
7900 XTX: 109 FPS

Resident Evil Village (4K, Ray Tracing)
RTX 4090: 175 FPS
7900 XTX: 138 FPS

If it was really that close they'd have shown benchmarks - they always did when they were gloating. Yet they didn't. They don't even believe in their own product. They shat on Nvidia all night for cable issues, display port support, gpu size, power consumption but when it came to showing off their product they did nothing.

 

[AusWolf]

If it was really that close they'd have shown benchmarks - they always did when they were gloating. Yet they didn't. They don't even believe in their own product. They shat on Nvidia all night for cable issues, display port support, gpu size, power consumption but when it came to showing off their product they did nothing.

That's probably because they're not targeting the 7900 XTX as a direct competitor of the 4090 - which also shows on its price tag.

 

[mahoney]

That's probably because they're not targeting the 7900 series as a direct competitor of the 4090 - which also shows on its price tag.

So the 6900xt wasn't a 3090 competitor? Are they just changing competition every gen based on how sucky their flagship product is?

 

[AusWolf]

So the 6900xt wasn't a 3090 competitor? Are they just changing competition every gen based on how sucky their flagship product is?

I didn't watch the 6900 XT launch, so I don't know. All I know is that a product launch isn't the proper channel to shit-talk about the competition. It's there to talk about your own product, which they just did.

We're slowly coming to an age when nobody cares if a GPU is 2% faster than the competition. Size, power efficiency and affordability start to matter to more and more gamers, and it looks like AMD realizes that.

Edit: As far as I recall, Nvidia never talks about AMD during their product launches. Are they hiding something too?

 

[mahoney]

I didn't watch the 6900 XT launch, so I don't know. All I know is that a product launch isn't the proper channel to shit-talk about the competition. It's there to talk about your own product, which they just did.

We're slowly coming to an age when nobody cares if a GPU is 2% faster than the competition. Size, power efficiency and affordability start to matter to more and more gamers, and it looks like AMD realizes that.

They were proudly showing off their 6000 series gpu products yet they barely showed anything now. Even if it was 10-15% slower than the 4090 it would have still been decent considering the price tag yet they still didn't dare to show their own product's benchmark results which would already be cherry picked. It's suspicious and then Azor comes out and says 7900xtx's main competitor is the 4080?

 

[z1n0x]

Yeah. As seen by AMD at the moment having higher margins, than NV... (and than Intel too? Ain't that? Not bad for "cheap brand" )

I think the good times are over for AMD. They had it easy against 14nm Skylake and Nvidia on older and inferior process nodes.
But now both Intel and Nvidia are getting serious. The milking of 14nm++++++ is over and Nvidia returned to cutting-edge TSMC process.
I have a solution for AMD thought. Lisa Su can always spend some more billions on share buybacks.

 

[AusWolf]

They were proudly showing off their 6000 series gpu products yet they barely showed anything now. Even if it was 10-15% slower than the 4090 it would have still been decent considering the price tag yet they still didn't dare to show their own product's benchmark results which would already be cherry picked. It's suspicious and then Azor comes out and says 7900xtx's main competitor is the 4080?

They showed what they intended the 7900 XTX for, which is 8K gaming at 60+ FPS thanks to FSR. If it's not a 4090 competitor, then there's no point comparing it to the 4090, is there?

Like I said, I don't recall Nvidia showing more numbers and AMD comparisons during their product launches, yet no one complains.