• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

RX 7900 XTX vs. RTX 4080

Status
Not open for further replies.
8

80251

Joined
Dec 12, 2020
Messages
1,755 (1.08/day)
I've noticed that the cheapest RTX 4080 is ~$1200 while the cheapest RX 7900 XTX is ~$1000, but the RX 7900 XTX has more performance on most every game than the 4080 in both min. FPS and avg. FPS according to W1zzard's review:
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asrock-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-taichi/34.html

Does the RX 7900 XTX lack the hardware ray tracing capabilities of Team Green? Would the hardware ray tracing effects of say Control or Cyberpunk 2077 or Metro: Exodus Enhanced Edition look any worse on the RX 7900 XTX than they would on an RTX 4080?

It's too bad Team Red doesn't support Gsync otherwise I'd be already buying an RX 7900 XTX...
 
80251 said:
I've noticed that the cheapest RTX 4080 is ~$1200 while the cheapest RX 7900 XTX is ~$1000, but the RX 7900 XTX has more performance on most every game than the 4080 in both min. FPS and avg. FPS according to W1zzard's review:
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asrock-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-taichi/34.html

Does the RX 7900 XTX lack the hardware ray tracing capabilities of Team Green? Would the hardware ray tracing effects of say Control or Cyberpunk 2077 or Metro: Exodus Enhanced Edition look any worse on the RX 7900 XTX than they would on an RTX 4080?

It's too bad Team Red doesn't support Gsync otherwise I'd be already buying an RX 7900 XTX...
Click to expand...

If you want Ray Tracing go Nvidia, if you want performance go AMD.

AMD haven't cought up to Nvidia with Ray Tracing yet but still depending on if you mis the performance hit Ray Tracing still gives.

Correct G-Syncis a Nvidia only thing, but most monitors got FreeSync and G-Sync expect the very expensive G-Sync monitors which have a dedicated G-Sync module.
 
Hi there,

I'm got the same dilemma. I've looked repeatedly into these two cards.

I've decided to go with the 4080 because of power, thermals, RTX capability's and also resell value. Drivers can come into play also, but this is not definite.

For me this is worth the extra $200.
 
The 4080 is more power efficient and its raytracing performance is simply superior, with the 7900 XTX being in line with the almost 3-year-old RTX 3090, that is to say, it's by no means bad, but it will lose the showdown against Ada Lovelace. The drivers are also in much better condition than AMD's right now, especially targeting this new hardware.

On the flip side, the 7900 XTX is cheaper, has a lot more memory, more raster performance and superior Linux drivers. Note I did not mention AMD's traditionally poor video encoder performance, AMD has managed to get that in order, so it's really not a concern any longer. Unless you do heavy encoding work, then the dual NVENC on 4080 might come as a plus, but for someone who's recording gameplays and streaming, the 7900 XTX closed the gap.

If you're a Windows gamer, and can spare the extra money, the RTX 4080 is a no-brainer. It's just a better product. If you're a Linux guy, don't even look at Nvidia. You'll dread the day you decided to purchase the card. Either way you go, you will have a great experience in newer games.
 
Lets not forget dlss 3 and frame generation. I did a cursory glance over the review and I could not find any part that stated they tested with these 2. If thats the case any game that has them as a feature, the 4080 will blow the 7900xtx out of the water in fps.
 
Appalachian said:
Lets not forget dlss 3 and frame generation. I did a cursory glance over the review and I could not find any part that stated they tested with these 2. If thats the case any game that has them as a feature, the 4080 will blow the 7900xtx out of the water in fps.
Click to expand...

While this is true, in 2 out of the 4 games I've tried it in It sucks and that seems to be the case in the majority of games so far. Just like DLSS I expect it to get much better with age but it was on the bottom of my list for going with a 4090 it's more of just a bonus vs a feature someone should make a buying decision on.
 
oxrufiioxo said:
While this is true, in 2 out of the 4 games I've tried it in It sucks and that seems to be the case in the majority of games so far. Just like DLSS I expect it to get much better with age but it was on the bottom of my list for going with a 4090 it's more of just a bonus vs a feature someone should make a buying decision on.
Click to expand...
I've been concerned about that on a game to game basis as well. The few games I play people in the forums have claimed frame gen is like magic. But as you confirmed it depends on the game. I have a 4090 arriving this week, can't wait to find out how well it works on my library.
 
I was faced with same dilemma, but went with 4080. Would have had to upgrade my 750w PSU if I went for the AMD card, so not much difference in actual cost. Finally I can use ray tracing maxed out at 4k in DLSS Quality mode in games like Cyberpunk and Hogwarts Legacy. I'm using it under-volted and at 80% power limit, so max power draw about 235w with only 5% reduction in performance. Quite happy with the card.
 
blued said:
I was faced with same dilemma, but went with 4080. Would have had to upgrade my 750w PSU if I went for the AMD card, so not much difference in actual cost. Finally I can use ray tracing maxed out at 4k in DLSS Quality mode in games like Cyberpunk and Hogwarts Legacy. I'm using it under-volted and at 80% power limit, so max power draw about 235w with only 5% reduction in performance. Quite happy with the card.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is something I'll be doing to, to make it run even more efficient which is still why I'm contemplating the 4090 as I will be PL-ing it. Just the price puts me off. Hmm decisions.

Nice work!

blued said:
I was faced with same dilemma, but went with 4080. Would have had to upgrade my 750w PSU if I went for the AMD card, so not much difference in actual cost. Finally I can use ray tracing maxed out at 4k in DLSS Quality mode in games like Cyberpunk and Hogwarts Legacy. I'm using it under-volted and at 80% power limit, so max power draw about 235w with only 5% reduction in performance. Quite happy with the card.
Click to expand...

Oh BTW,

What frames are you getting with Hogwarts with the 4080 and with what res?

Thanks again.
 
blued said:
I was faced with same dilemma, but went with 4080. Would have had to upgrade my 750w PSU if I went for the AMD card, so not much difference in actual cost. Finally I can use ray tracing maxed out at 4k in DLSS Quality mode in games like Cyberpunk and Hogwarts Legacy. I'm using it under-volted and at 80% power limit, so max power draw about 235w with only 5% reduction in performance. Quite happy with the card.
Click to expand...
wow. 235w and getting that kind of performance is impressive. Thats 100 less watts than even my 3080 draws and still murders my performance. I hope my new one undervolts as well as that. I only have an 850w but the one I have on the way recommends 1000w. Its a nice PSU and new, so i'm hoping it will be ok.
 
Appalachian said:
wow. 235w and getting that kind of performance is impressive. Thats 100 less watts than even my 3080 draws and still murders my performance. I hope my new one undervolts as well as that. I only have an 850w but the one I have on the way recommends 1000w. Its a nice PSU and new, so i'm hoping it will be ok.
Click to expand...
Ironically thats where I got the idea to UV and PL the card, from seeing others do it to their 3080s with similar power reductions. I have no idea about the 4090 and its UV/PL potentials.
 
There's very few situations where the traditional raster of the 4080 wouldn't be more than enough, at any resolution and monitor combo. E.g. My 3080 Ti already gets more than 200 FPS average in non ray traced games at 1440p maxed, and my monitor caps at 240. However there are many situations where the Ray tracing performance of the 7900XTX wouldn't be enough to maintain even 60 fps, which is the lowest refresh rate of any monitor.

Add to this the efficiency, RTX feature set, software advantage of the 4080...
 
Its really a matter of if Ray Tracing is that important to you. In my opinion, the RX 7900 XTX is a better value and better performer than the RTX 4080 is most areas except Ray Tracing. Down side is although Ray Tracing has come a long way, you still give up a ton of performance even on the RTX 4080 when running it (Yes DLSS definitely helps). So really its just a matter of want out of the card.

Like I said, I would get the RX 7900 XTX of the two.
 
I Went from a founders 4080 to a 7900XTX Red Devil.
IMO you cant go wrong with either one.

I Hadn't had an AMD card since my old 7970 and picked up the 7900XTX Purely out of curiosity, ended up keeping it (and selling my 4080 for what i paid for it which was MSRP)

As luck would have it, the main game i play every day.. COD MW2 (I know...) the 7900XTX matches/beats a 4090 there.

As someone previously mentioned, DO consider drivers also.. I like how the overlay/overclock/tuning is built into the AMD Drivers BUT i will say the NVIDIA drivers are more polished/stable.
 
Psychoholic said:
I Went from a founders 4080 to a 7900XTX Red Devil.
IMO you cant go wrong with either one.

I Hadn't had an AMD card since my old 7970 and picked up the 7900XTX Purely out of curiosity, ended up keeping it (and selling my 4080 for what i paid for it which was MSRP)

As luck would have it, the main game i play every day.. COD MW2 (I know...) the 7900XTX matches/beats a 4090 there.

As someone previously mentioned, DO consider drivers also.. I like how the overlay/overclock/tuning is built into the AMD Drivers BUT i will say the NVIDIA drivers are more polished/stable.
Click to expand...

I definitely don't envy anyone in this general price range both cards offer very similar rasterized performance the Radeon card is 200 usd cheaper but the 4080 is more efficient in general and can have vastly superior RT depending on game so it's tough. Like you say hard to go wrong with either. Neither are good from a value perspective but both offer excellent performance and have their strong points.

And if you primarily play COD it's probably a no brainer to go with the 7900XTX..... Although it's not overly difficult assuming you have the cpu grunt to get over 240fps with any of the top 3 or 4 cards so how much that matters I guess is debatable. COD is in a weird place right now to get the most out of it you need a maxed out 13900k with an AMD GPU and 8000 MTs mem lol. Although the 7800X3D might do pretty well to get within 10% without much effort it seems. At least when it comes to Warzone...
 
Bleh. The 4090 I ordered was DOA. This thread got me thinking I am going to move down a price tier to 7900xtx/4080. 7900 looks sweet but I really like ray tracing so its probably going to be a 4080.
 
@Appalachian
What model/manufacturer of 4090 did you get that was DOA?

Is the 4090 the full Ada die? Or is there an Ada Titan or 4090 Ti in the works for that?
 
4090 isn't full die.
 
80251 said:
@Appalachian
What model/manufacturer of 4090 did you get that was DOA?

Is the 4090 the full Ada die? Or is there an Ada Titan or 4090 Ti in the works for that?
Click to expand...
It was a Gigabyte gaming OC. I had problems getting it to seat due to the weird design of the SATA ports on my MB. Instead of being flush with the board like i'm used to the ports are in a stack pointing off the side. This module of ports stand a good half inch off the board and wouldnt let the card seat at all with the anti-sag bracket on. I took it off and it clicked in, but on further thought I think maybe it still couldn't be seated all the way.

Its either that or it was in fact DOA. I'm leaning towards the former now though.
 
I'd buy the 4080 if I were making the same choice, yes it's more expensive, but in my opinion is the better overall product.

the 7900XTX takes a negligible win overall in rasterization, and has 24GB of VRAM

The 4080 is more efficient, more capable/versatile, has more features and less bugs.
 
Just to play devils advocate and share my recent experience:

I just upgraded from the 3070 to the 4080 on sale ($300 AUD off), which brought the price down to just $100 AUD above the MSRP of the 7900XTX.
While I'm stoked with my purchase (for the price I got), I do believe I rushed my purchase. I'm happy with the 4080, don't get me wrong, but I think if the 7900XTX was $150 AUD cheaper or more I'd get that everytime.
24GB of Vram, wider VRAM bus, DP2.1 and USB-C ports (for my PSVR2 hacks) would have all been really useful to me. + Software package is more modern and nicer and I personally have had more bugs on my 3070 than the AMD I had before it.

While I love the idea of RT, I really enjoy high framerates (I struggle with even singleplayer games <90 fps). So for me until the tech can reach high framerates with RT on I won't really use the feature. DLSS 2 is nice, especially in games where FSR 2.2 hasn't been retrofitted, but I can't deal with the increased input lag from DLSS 3. It reminded me of playing on older TVs that had no ALLM. I'd fire up Rocket League and go from Champ level play to SIlver with that 100ms input lag. Finally the 7900XTX performed really well with Fortnight hardware accellerated RT. I think with both consoles rocking AMD and Unreal Engine 5.2 being a big deal, AMD may go from abysmall to nearly as performant as NVidia in the near future (without a change to the silicon). Saying that I think we'll need Nvidia and AMDs next generation to fully extract consistent performance from Lumen in the UE5 engine.

Both cards are awesome! You can't really lose out either way.

Although if you own a PSVR2 and want to use it with SteamVR don't make the mistake I did and forget you need a USB-C video out!
 
It seems from what is said here that ray tracing is the main reason for a 4080 over a 7900XTX. As has been mentioned, with more games utilising Unreal Engine 5 the position on ray tracing will change. I guess others wanting to go with Nvidia will then emphasise power saving, performance in certain non-gaming applications and the driver interface and features (even though it's clunky and old) - all valid reasons. Personally, I haven't pulled the trigger yet on a new GPU but the 4080 is not on my radar. I'm just saving my pennies for a 4090.

Although I have just spotted a Powercolor Liquid Devil 7900XTX for $100 less than the 4080 MSRP :eek:
 
I have the RX 7900 XTX in my main rig, and the only game of any interest to me with RT (NOT RTX as so many would call it) enabled is Metro Exodus (or ME) PC Enhanced, part of the reason why I'd made the jump from the RX 6900 XT to the RX 7900 XTX. More VRAM plus better RT implementation, RT performance from what I've seen is that it performs to about RTX 3080/3090 level, which is good enough for me. The RX 6900 XT with RT enabled was NOT a pleasant experience for ME PC Enhanced, the RX 7900 XTX allowed me to run the game with graphics maxed out + RT at 3840x1080 and still net 70fps and higher.

Other games with RT do not interest me, though the RX 7900 XTX can handle games with lighter implementations of RT. Also looking forward to see what AMD can do with FSR3, which would not only benefit AMD cards, nVidia and Intel cards as well.....I believe even the GTX line of cards would benefit (though the level of benefit depends on the sheer processing grunt of the GPU in question). But hey, FSR1.x/2.x/3 can provide a boost for all older cards, and that's always a good thing.
 
vram usage on 2160p = 15-16gb, so ...... vote to radeon rx 7900 xtx 24gb.....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top