AMD Radeon RX 9070 Series Launch Event Slated for Late-February

[freeurmind]

I'm in on this one if they can beat the 5090 with no AI/DLSS/FRAME INSERTION

 

[ToxicTaZ]

I'm in on this one if they can beat the 5090 with no AI/DLSS/FRAME INSERTION

They won't be even able to beat a 2-year-old reg RTX 4080 lol (Without DLSS 3)

AMD GPU division is obviously broken, canceled their high-end and can't compete with their competitors 2-year-old midrange GPU.

Facts are facts... I don't like it because competition makes healthy environments for performance increases there is none except for extreme expensive very disappointing across the board from all GPUs.

Feels like we're going backwards instead of forward no innovation just fake frames and fancy marketing.

Cheers

I'm not trying to make anything... if part of the chart is wrong then why should I consider it? The chart shows the 4080 faster than the 7900xtx... we all know that's wrong unless it's not raster. I don't use frame gen or any of that mess I like natural gaming with minimal latency. Go spread that fud to someone that cares to take you and ngreedias pricing.
7900xtx is better and was cheaper than a 4080(s) yet ppl still bought the nvidia card. Ppl like you is why the market is the way it is. Yall cry n moan about features yall don't use.


So i guess a 5070=4090 right...o my bad it's nvidia... they can do no wrong. I guess we should believe them

My MSI RTX 4080 Super 16G SUPRIM X (320w) designed to blow away RX 7900XTX (355w)

BTW I bought my 4080 Super cheaper than the 7900 XTX. And you want to talk about a mess? RDNA3?...Bunch of artifact blur no wonder you don't want to use special features. People like me bring the market forward cuz we're actually buying performance cards driving the industry forward caring about real more performance not Blurry Fake Frames artifacts jello mess DLSS 4 & RDNA4. If AI is the future with multi-frame generation is the only performance we're all doomed. Fanboys can brag all day about fake frames blurred vision. Nvidia extremely not doing anything as well broken drivers bricking cards nonsense for a top company I'm not picking any company I only pick stuff that it's been proven performance not by some chart or personal feelings.

GPU company should be ashamed of themselves us consumers getting basically nothing for the highest prices and yet fanboys trying to protect them.... maybe their charts are wrong sounds like a little kid talking.

The RX 9070XT 330w well not outperform the over two years old regular RTX 4080 320w. Pretty much end of story on this subject the facts have been out for a while everybody already knows. It's a huge PR disaster for both companies.

And where is the MSI RX 9070XT? Did MSI drop AMD Radeon 9000 Series?

Cheers

 

[Dawora]

I'm not trying to make anything... if part of the chart is wrong then why should I consider it? The chart shows the 4080 faster than the 7900xtx... we all know that's wrong unless it's not raster. I don't use frame gen or any of that mess I like natural gaming with minimal latency. Go spread that fud to someone that cares to take you and ngreedias pricing.
7900xtx is better and was cheaper than a 4080(s) yet ppl still bought the nvidia card. Ppl like you is why the market is the way it is. Yall cry n moan about features yall don't use.


So i guess a 5070=4090 right...o my bad it's nvidia... they can do no wrong. I guess we should believe them.

DLSS is just so good, AMD gpus are worthless if they cant compete agains DLSS.
Only real Amd warriors buy AMD atm, if AMD cant make fast+cheap GPUs whit great features soon there is no more AMD users = no more Amd Gpus = no more Amd Nvidia fight in Forums = Dream come true..

 

[springs113]

They won't be even able to beat a 2-year-old reg RTX 4080 lol (Without DLSS 3)

AMD GPU division is obviously broken, canceled their high-end and can't compete with their competitors 2-year-old midrange GPU.

Facts are facts... I don't like it because competition makes healthy environments for performance increases there is none except for extreme expensive very disappointing across the board from all GPUs.

Feels like we're going backwards instead of forward no innovation just fake frames and fancy marketing.

Cheers


My MSI RTX 4080 Super 16G SUPRIM X (320w) designed to blow away RX 7900XTX (355w)

BTW I bought my 4080 Super cheaper than the 7900 XTX. And you want to talk about a mess? RDNA3?...Bunch of artifact blur no wonder you don't want to use special features. People like me bring the market forward cuz we're actually buying performance cards driving the industry forward caring about real more performance not Blurry Fake Frames artifacts jello mess DLSS 4 & RDNA4. If AI is the future with multi-frame generation is the only performance we're all doomed. Fanboys can brag all day about fake frames blurred vision. Nvidia extremely not doing anything as well broken drivers bricking cards nonsense for a top company I'm not picking any company I only pick stuff that it's been proven performance not by some chart or personal feelings.

GPU company should be ashamed of themselves us consumers getting basically nothing for the highest prices and yet fanboys trying to protect them.... maybe their charts are wrong sounds like a little kid talking.

The RX 9070XT 330w well not outperform the over two years old regular RTX 4080 320w. Pretty much end of story on this subject the facts have been out for a while everybody already knows. It's a huge PR disaster for both companies.

And where is the MSI RX 9070XT? Did MSI drop AMD Radeon 9000 Series?

Cheers

What's childish is calling ppl names because their opinions differ from yours.
In all honesty where did nvidia push the envelope? The 5090 is power hungry and yet ppl overlooking it like 575w for a gpu should be welcomed. The 5090 vs 4090 is not a step forward and neither is the 5080 vs 4080. It's that blind fanboyism that's the problem. If i was upgrading from let's say a 1080, 2080, Vega 64, Radeon 7 or 5700xt. There's really only 2 cards I'd buy...a 4080s or 7900xtx. I won't be a hypocrite and say that I wouldn't consider the 5080 but only if I'd get it at the 999 price tag... nothing more.

Yall can sit here and defend nvidia all you want... I'm not defending either company 'cause all they truly want is my money at the end of the day. What I will not do is believe the crap I constantly see here or many other forums from ppl who only look at things one way. When AMD delivered good gpus ppl still didn't buy them. Ppl did that continuously until the market is the way it is now. Now yall same ppl who didn't buy those gpus want to turn around and complain that the market is this way because of AMD. No it's yall fault, now pay the nvidia tax n be happy. The 5070=4090.
This ish is comical at best. Sorry not sorry.

DLSS is just so good, AMD gpus are worthless if they cant compete agains DLSS.
Only real Amd warriors buy AMD atm, if AMD cant make fast+cheap GPUs whit great features soon there is no more AMD users = no more Amd Gpus = no more Amd Nvidia fight in Forums = Dream come true..

This is exactly what I'm talking about...AMD is crap? Really. I own both but you know who's crap(scummy) nvidia. You know the same company that wanted GPP. But I guess we all forget so easily right. The same company that tried to sell the 12gb 4080 right, got called out, backtracked only to do it again with the rtx 50 series. But hey, I digress.

 

[ToxicTaZ]

What's childish is calling ppl names because their opinions differ from yours.
In all honesty where did nvidia push the envelope? The 5090 is power hungry and yet ppl overlooking it like 575w for a gpu should be welcomed. The 5090 vs 4090 is not a step forward and neither is the 5080 vs 4080. It's that blind fanboyism that's the problem. If i was upgrading from let's say a 1080, 2080, Vega 64, Radeon 7 or 5700xt. There's really only 2 cards I'd buy...a 4080s or 7900xtx. I won't be a hypocrite and say that I wouldn't consider the 5080 but only if I'd get it at the 999 price tag... nothing more.

Yall can sit here and defend nvidia all you want... I'm not defending either company 'cause all they truly want is my money at the end of the day. What I will not do is believe the crap I constantly see here or many other forums from ppl who only look at things one way. When AMD delivered good gpus ppl still didn't buy them. Ppl did that continuously until the market is the way it is now. Now yall same ppl who didn't buy those gpus want to turn around and complain that the market is this way because of AMD. No it's yall fault, now pay the nvidia tax n be happy. The 5070=4090.
This ish is comical at best. Sorry not sorry.

This is exactly what I'm talking about...AMD is crap? Really. I own both but you know who's crap(scummy) nvidia. You know the same company that wanted GPP. But I guess we all forget so easily right. The same company that tried to sell the 12gb 4080 right, got called out, backtracked only to do it again with the rtx 50 series. But hey, I digress.

I'm very glad I bought my MSI RTX 4080 Super 16G SUPRIM X super duper card.

Basically Nvidia SUPER Series are unlocked Refresh relaunch with more performance at a lower price point.

I upgraded from my 5 years old RTX 2080 Super 8GB to RTX 4080 Super 16GB best decision ever! RTX 2080 Super was a good solid performing long lasting card for it's time. Good luck with old Nvidia Turing TU104 then upgraded to the Nvidia Ada Lovelace AD103 GPU blows your mind. That's a decent upgrade for me at least.

I'm very disappointed with next-gen hardware from both companies this time around. The AMD 7900 XTX 24GB will remain AMD's best GPU king beast! And Nvidia RTX 4080 Super 16GB will remain above next-gen med range 70s series from both.

RTX 4080 16GB was a cut down ridiculous overpriced GPU with the right performance that everyone in the future still wants at a lower price point that's what's happening.

The 90 Series will remain the icing on the cake cream of the crop Untouchable performance overpriced bragging rights gpus get the job done GPUs.

I'm really curious to see the pricing they're going to try to put out on these mid-range cards with similar performance.

Cheers

 

[Bomby569]

AMD is "cleaver"
AMD is going to "deliver"
AMD is going to "surprise us"

boy do people live in another planet.

 

[AusWolf]

Basically Nvidia SUPER Series are unlocked Refresh relaunch with more performance at a lower price point.

No. It's chips with more enabled cores retained at manufacturing, only to sell the lesser part for a higher price first, and then drop the illusion of Nvidia giving you more later, when in fact, it is the chip you should have gotten from the start. And it's not a refresh. It's the exact same architecture down to to every small detail. If the fully enabled AD103 cost you $1000, then there was absolutely no reason for the cut-down version to cost $200 more.

I upgraded from my 5 years old RTX 2080 Super 8GB to RTX 4080 Super 16GB best decision ever! RTX 2080 Super was a good solid performing long lasting card for it's time. Good luck with old Nvidia Turing TU104 then upgraded to the Nvidia Ada Lovelace AD103 GPU blows your mind. That's a decent upgrade for me at least.

Good for you. No one said the 4080 Super is a bad card. It's not. In fact, anyone with any GPU within their price bracket should be happy. The age of bad GPUs (S3 ViRGE, GeForce FX 5200) is long gone.

RTX 4080 16GB was a cut down ridiculous overpriced GPU with the right performance that everyone in the future still wants at a lower price point that's what's happening.

We got the lower price point with the 4080 Super. Where's the lower price point now?

 

[ToxicTaZ]

No. It's chips with more enabled cores retained at manufacturing, only to sell the lesser part for a higher price first, and then drop the illusion of Nvidia giving you more later, when in fact, it is the chip you should have gotten from the start. And it's not a refresh. It's the exact same architecture down to to every small detail. If the fully enabled AD103 cost you $1000, then there was absolutely no reason for the cut-down version to cost $200 more.


Good for you. No one said the 4080 Super is a bad card. It's not. In fact, anyone with any GPU within their price bracket should be happy. The age of bad GPUs (S3 ViRGE, GeForce FX 5200) is long gone.


We got the lower price point with the 4080 Super. Where's the lower price point now?

Lower price point now would be the upcoming RX 9070XT 330w & RTX 5070Ti 300w with "similar" performance with the RTX 4080 320w.

"Everyone in this thread getting excited for the RTX 4080 performance RX 9070XT 330w card with a lower price point."

Cheers

 

[PixelTech]

Pretty obvious now, considering how bad Nvidia's GPUs are, why they priced the 5070 unexpectedly lower than what we were anticipating.

The AMD delay is looking more like ...
-Let's build up more supply
-Adjust the price
-Fine tune the drivers and FSR 4

because there is no need to rush, the 5070 is most likely garbage.

Perfectly stated.

 

[Dawora]

What's childish is calling ppl names because their opinions differ from yours.
In all honesty where did nvidia push the envelope? The 5090 is power hungry and yet ppl overlooking it like 575w for a gpu should be welcomed. The 5090 vs 4090 is not a step forward and neither is the 5080 vs 4080. It's that blind fanboyism that's the problem. If i was upgrading from let's say a 1080, 2080, Vega 64, Radeon 7 or 5700xt. There's really only 2 cards I'd buy...a 4080s or 7900xtx. I won't be a hypocrite and say that I wouldn't consider the 5080 but only if I'd get it at the 999 price tag... nothing more.

Yall can sit here and defend nvidia all you want... I'm not defending either company 'cause all they truly want is my money at the end of the day. What I will not do is believe the crap I constantly see here or many other forums from ppl who only look at things one way. When AMD delivered good gpus ppl still didn't buy them. Ppl did that continuously until the market is the way it is now. Now yall same ppl who didn't buy those gpus want to turn around and complain that the market is this way because of AMD. No it's yall fault, now pay the nvidia tax n be happy. The 5070=4090.
This ish is comical at best. Sorry not sorry.

This is exactly what I'm talking about...AMD is crap? Really. I own both but you know who's crap(scummy) nvidia. You know the same company that wanted GPP. But I guess we all forget so easily right. The same company that tried to sell the 12gb 4080 right, got called out, backtracked only to do it again with the rtx 50 series. But hey, I digress.

Dont buy 12Gb GPU if u dont like it, there is Gpus whit more Vram.

RX50 series 5060ti is 16Gb 5070Ti is 16Gb
Also AMD use more Vram than Nvidia,thats fun fact.

AMD is "cleaver"
AMD is going to "deliver"
AMD is going to "surprise us"

boy do people live in another planet.

its AMD hype train everytime when AMD is releasing something new.

More the hype better the gpus will be, thats how Amd fans usualy think, but hopes and dreams are not reality and then there is only disappointment, Amd cant deliver because huge hype train..tsuut tsuut

Pretty obvious now, considering how bad Nvidia's GPUs are, why they priced the 5070 unexpectedly lower than what we were anticipating.

The AMD delay is looking more like ...
-Let's build up more supply
-Adjust the price
-Fine tune the drivers and FSR 4

because there is no need to rush, the 5070 is most likely garbage.

AMD have never miss opportunity to miss opportunity

 

[freeurmind]

It's interesting to me that people will pay $1,000 just for a GPU, and sometimes even $2,000, to gain something like +20fps in like 5-10 games. Then they turn around and say Sony should have released a PlayStation that cost $50 and can get 120 fps in Cyberpunk on max settings... Like, how could the PS5 not cost more than $2,000 if it could do that???

 

[ToxicTaZ]

It's interesting to me that people will pay $1,000 just for a GPU, and sometimes even $2,000, to gain something like +20fps in like 5-10 games. Then they turn around and say Sony should have released a PlayStation that cost $50 and can get 120 fps in Cyberpunk on max settings... Like, how could the PS5 not cost more than $2,000 if it could do that???

Give me Solid 144fps an extra 24fps more performance please is where it's at my opinion.

I rather have my MSI RTX 4080 Super 16G SUPRIM X @144fps @Max Settings (Ultra mode+) ‍ over the Sony PS5 Pro 2TB @120fps any day just my opinion of choice and some I guess would have it the other way around..

Cheers

 

[RandallFlagg]

Yall can sit here and defend nvidia all you want... I'm not defending either company 'cause all they truly want is my money at the end of the day. What I will not do is believe the crap I constantly see here or many other forums from ppl who only look at things one way. When AMD delivered good gpus ppl still didn't buy them. Ppl did that continuously until the market is the way it is now. Now yall same ppl who didn't buy those gpus want to turn around and complain that the market is this way because of AMD. No it's yall fault, now pay the nvidia tax n be happy. The 5070=4090.
This ish is comical at best. Sorry not sorry.

If you look at what most people who post here have, they are all in either with $1500 3080s from Covid era that they still haven't paid off or 4080+, so these cards don't interest them.

Which baits the question of why they are even posting here. These cards aren't made for them, they should go have fun explaining to their children why they can't go to college or to the spouse why they can't retire for a few more years after they spend $2000 on a GPU every 2 years.

That said, it isn't the high end that has had a dearth of performance increases, it's the midrange and low end. Nvidia has really abandoned those segments, basically had zero uplift with the 4060/4060 Ti. Intel seems to be targeting the lower end of the midrange (4060 and below) with the A580 while AMD is clearly targeting the middle and upper end. And in those respective brackets, they do very well.

The 7700 XT as example, which can be had for right around $400 (prices ticking up recently tho) and soundly wallops Nvidia's 4060 Ti competitor by > 23% at 4K. It had a 25-30% uplift vs 6700 XT and if we get 7900 XT performance from the 9070 / 9070 XT, it'll be a hot product. More realistically, 7800 XT performance levels at sub $500 is still going to be a good deal.

 

[ToxicTaZ]

If you look at what most people who post here have, they are all in either with $1500 3080s from Covid era that they still haven't paid off or 4080+, so these cards don't interest them.

Which baits the question of why they are even posting here. These cards aren't made for them, they should go have fun explaining to their children why they can't go to college or to the spouse why they can't retire for a few more years after they spend $2000 on a GPU every 2 years.

That said, it isn't the high end that has had a dearth of performance increases, it's the midrange and low end. Nvidia has really abandoned those segments, basically had zero uplift with the 4060/4060 Ti. Intel seems to be targeting the lower end of the midrange (4060 and below) with the A580 while AMD is clearly targeting the middle and upper end. And in those respective brackets, they do very well.

The 7700 XT as example, which can be had for right around $400 (prices ticking up recently tho) and soundly wallops Nvidia's 4060 Ti competitor by > 23% at 4K. It had a 25-30% uplift vs 6700 XT and if we get 7900 XT performance from the 9070 / 9070 XT, it'll be a hot product. More realistically, 7800 XT performance levels at sub $500 is still going to be a good deal.

Basically the 9070 is just above the 7900 GRE performance and the 9070XT is just above the 7900 XT performance at a lower price point.

What else would you expect??

Cheers

 

[RandallFlagg]

Basically the 9070 is just above the 7900 GRE performance and the 9070XT is just above the 7900 XT performance at a lower price point.

What else would you expect??

Cheers

The 9070 / 9070 XT should be a replacement for the 7700 XT. So normally I'd expect them to perform ~7800 XT level. If they are performing at 7900 / 7900 XT level, then that's a win, assuming the price is still in the sub $500 range of the 7700 XT.

But to the point of what I posted, you said you have a 4080 Super. What do you care?

 

[truehighroller1]

If you look at what most people who post here have, they are all in either with $1500 3080s from Covid era that they still haven't paid off or 4080+, so these cards don't interest them.

Which baits the question of why they are even posting here. These cards aren't made for them, they should go have fun explaining to their children why they can't go to college or to the spouse why they can't retire for a few more years after they spend $2000 on a GPU every 2 years.

That said, it isn't the high end that has had a dearth of performance increases, it's the midrange and low end. Nvidia has really abandoned those segments, basically had zero uplift with the 4060/4060 Ti. Intel seems to be targeting the lower end of the midrange (4060 and below) with the A580 while AMD is clearly targeting the middle and upper end. And in those respective brackets, they do very well.

The 7700 XT as example, which can be had for right around $400 (prices ticking up recently tho) and soundly wallops Nvidia's 4060 Ti competitor by > 23% at 4K. It had a 25-30% uplift vs 6700 XT and if we get 7900 XT performance from the 9070 / 9070 XT, it'll be a hot product. More realistically, 7800 XT performance levels at sub $500 is still going to be a good deal.

I paid $1300 for my 3090 suprim when COVID started. Waited in line for it with my oldest kid. I'll upgrade to 5080 or this new AMD depending on which is better performance price wise at this point.

 

[ToxicTaZ]

The 9070 / 9070 XT should be a replacement for the 7700 XT. So normally I'd expect them to perform ~7800 XT level. If they are performing at 7900 / 7900 XT level, then that's a win, assuming the price is still in the sub $500 range of the 7700 XT.

But to the point of what I posted, you said you have a 4080 Super. What do you care?

I'm busy battling it out with the AMD 7900 XTX 24GB blow for blow with my 4080 Super 16GB but with games that use 20GB+ VRAM my 16GB VRAM is a bottleneck texture swapping takes a performance hit. Good thing dedicated Hardware DLSS 3 Saves the Day most of the time in most benchmarks especially with DLSS 4 RTX Enhanced driver games support.

The AMD 7900 Series was their best GPUs in years by far so much even their next-gen 9000 Series has a hard time outperforming it. The RX 7900 XTX 24GB will remain King AMD's best GPU.

Nvidia SUPER Series is their answer to AMD 7900 Series. Best GPU battles in benchmarks in years going on here that's how it should be.

RX 7600 XT is Sony PS5 Pro level of performance.

So you're saying 9070/9070 XT around the 7900/7900 XT performance at the 7700 XT / 7800 XT price point? replacement streamline both series. This would sell cards....Very interesting...

Nvidia 5070 5% faster than the 4070 Super at the same price.

Nvidia 5070Ti 10% faster than the 4070Ti Super at the same price.

Nvidia 5080 15% faster than the RTX 4080 Super at the same price.

That what else would you expect?

Cheers

 

[PleaseBeCareful]

Who else is waiting for the surprise 9080 /9080XT event lol? Which may or may not happen of course . But there's a desire for it....

 

[Visible Noise]

Holy lurker Batman!

 

[RandallFlagg]

So you're saying 9070/9070 XT around the 7900/7900 XT performance at the 7700 XT / 7800 XT price point? replacement streamline both series. This would sell cards....Very interesting...

That's not what I said. Read it again.

I expect it'll be closer to the 7800 XT. If I'm wrong, that's great, but I doubt it.

 

[Dawora]

It's interesting to me that people will pay $1,000 just for a GPU, and sometimes even $2,000, to gain something like +20fps in like 5-10 games. Then they turn around and say Sony should have released a PlayStation that cost $50 and can get 120 fps in Cyberpunk on max settings... Like, how could the PS5 not cost more than $2,000 if it could do that???

+20fps?

My main PC whit 5090 got over 40fps more vs 4090 in 4K/5K

Second PC whit 5090 got over 100fps more vs 3080 in 4K and thats just huge!

And other PC whit 5080 got around 70fps more in 1440p vs 3080

think about those who have something like 2080/3070 Gpus or similar.. and they upgrade now it will be much more than +20fps if they buy 1000$-2000$ GPU

 

[AusWolf]

The 9070 / 9070 XT should be a replacement for the 7700 XT. So normally I'd expect them to perform ~7800 XT level. If they are performing at 7900 / 7900 XT level, then that's a win, assuming the price is still in the sub $500 range of the 7700 XT.

That's only if you assume that model names mean anything. I don't. Spec and price-wise, the 7800 XT is the replacement of the 6700 XT, offering 50% more performance for the same price. If we assume the same from the 9070 XT, then it should offer 50% more performance than the 7800 XT at the same price. That puts it between the 7900 XT and XTX for $500-550.

That is just the ideal situation, of course. Reality may differ.

 

[RandallFlagg]

That's only if you assume that model names mean anything. I don't. Spec and price-wise, the 7800 XT is the replacement of the 6700 XT, offering 50% more performance for the same price. If we assume the same from the 9070 XT, then it should offer 50% more performance than the 7800 XT at the same price. That puts it between the 7900 XT and XTX for $500-550.

That is just the ideal situation, of course. Reality may differ.

Model names have always meant something. Most of the people who have issue with new models are looking at spec sheets, not performance numbers.

The model is the performance target (market segment and cost), the specs are just how the engineers decided to get there.

I don't know why you think it'll give 50% more than a 7800 XT. Neither the specs nor the model name imply that.

This card is not going to make AMDs 70/700 series competitive with Nvidia 5070s, and if I'm wrong and it does it'll be a $1000 card. I don't particularly want to see that.

I do think it will be slightly faster than a 7800 XT based on the spec sheet, but only just. As in, ~5-10%. That's totally normal from past upgrade cycles. It's also enough to get past 6900 XT performance, but probably won't beat the 3090 and certainly not 7900 XT.

@4K:

 

[AusWolf]

Model names have always meant something. Most of the people who have issue with new models are looking at spec sheets, not performance numbers.

The model is the performance target (market segment and cost), the specs are just how the engineers decided to get there.

I disagree. Model names don't mean anything. Price and its ratio with performance does. The 6700 XT was a $479 card. The 7800 XT was a $499 card. The 6800 XT was $649. Therefore, the 7800 XT is the successor of the 6700 XT, not the 6800 XT (not ot mention it's the mid-grade chip in the series, just like the 6700 XT was). They could have called it the Potato FX 9000 if all I care, it wouldn't have changed a thing.

Model names are a marketing gimmick to make you believe things that help the company sell the product - and not help you form an educated decision in any way.

I don't know why you think it'll give 50% more than a 7800 XT. Neither the specs nor the model name imply that.

I never said it will. I said that's a best case scenario based on the above example. It might end up being something entirely different.

Based on specs alone, I'm expecting 7900 GRE level performance (4k cores at ~3 GHz = 5k cores at 2.4 GHz) at pure raster, but we don't know about any architectural gains, and I don't like speculating, so I'll reserve my judgement until we have accurate, reviewed performance data and know the exact price.

 

[RandallFlagg]

I disagree. Model names don't mean anything. Price and its ratio with performance does. The 6700 XT was a $479 card. The 7800 XT was a $499 card. The 6800 XT was $649. Therefore, the 7800 XT is the successor of the 6700 XT, not the 6800 XT (not ot mention it's the mid-grade chip in the series, just like the 6700 XT was). They could have called it the Potato FX 9000 if all I care, it wouldn't have changed a thing.

The 7800 XT has the same mid-grade Navi 32 XL chip that the 7700 XT has.

But again, you're doing exactly what I said which is looking at a spec sheet and not the market positioning in terms of performance and price.

But even if we play that game, I think it's pretty obvious that these 2 cards are the same tier (6700 XT vs 7700 XT):