AMD Radeon "RX 8800 XT" is Actually the RX 9070 XT?

[olymind1]

So basicly it will be a 8800 XT 16GB GDDR6 card renamed to 9700 XT renamed to 9070 XT 16GB sold at x800 XT card level prices while has half the bandwidth as GDDR7 which will be on nvidia cards, and they wonder why people don't buy rebrandeon.

A little retrospect:

2002 - Radeon 9700 256bit 128MB DDR -250$
2016 - Radeon RX480 256bit 8GB GDDR5 -250$ (14 years later same price 64x !!! vram)
2024 - Radeon 7800XT 256bit 16GB GDDR6 - 450-500$ (8 years later, 1.75-2x price, 2x vram)
2025 - Radeon 9070 XT 256bit 16GB GDDR6 - 500-650$ ?

Again, no wonder they did and will loose marketshare.

Though I'm curious about GDDR7 on cheaper Nv products, but probably won't buy them either.

 

[The N]

I wish AMD could focus on improvements internally at the performace and optimization level across all departments to challenge Nvidia. But instead, AMD is playing with naming/rebranding things which no one has asked for.

 

[Vayra86]

That 3.5gb vram on GTX 970 was not big issue. In my gpu history i would say GTX 970 is one of the best gpus i ever had p/p was simply amazing 145w tdp and silent operation. In today's gpu market nothing comes even close!

To me 8800 sounds better than 9700 but whatever.... AMD always has some strange marketing problems.

Not a big issue but a blatant lie nonetheless, and settled in court. So it was certainly big enough, and either way, that point isn't relevant anymore. Nvidia lied to you. Simple. You got a 'lot of GPU' but it got the x60 bus treatment that we knew Nvidia for since Fermi. The 970 crossed the limits of what was acceptable with asymmetric bus management.

So basicly it will be a 8800 XT 16GB GDDR6 card renamed to 9700 XT renamed to 9070 XT 16GB sold at x800 XT card level prices while has half the bandwidth as GDDR7 which will be on nvidia cards, and they wonder why people don't buy rebrandeon.

A little retrospect:

2002 - Radeon 9700 256bit 128MB DDR -250$
2016 - Radeon RX480 256bit 8GB GDDR5 -250$ (14 years later same price 64x !!! vram)
2024 - Radeon 7800XT 256bit 16GB GDDR6 - 450-500$ (8 years later, 1.75-2x price, 2x vram)
2025 - Radeon 9070 XT 256bit 16GB GDDR6 - 500-650$ ?

Again, no wonder they did and will loose marketshare.

Though I'm curious about GDDR7 on cheaper Nv products, but probably won't buy them either.

A little retrospect for the other camp to give some perspective here.

GTX 1080: 8GB (2016) - MSRP: 599,-
4080: 16GB (2023) - MSRP: 1199,- (a solid 2x price, 2x VRAM, 2x the price of AMD's 16GB)
5080: 16GB (2025) - MSRP: >1k (hey look, its virtually the same thing you posted above!)

What does 500,- get you on Nvidia?
12GB.
Or 16GB on a 4060ti without bandwidth.

AMD losing the marketshare it has, realistically makes no sense, but that only shows if you can disconnect from the endless stream of DLSS/RT marketing. Do you really have something in your hands with DLSS, or is this just a fancy way to keep selling you Nvidia GPUs just like Gsync? And RT? Is this tech really making your gaming better, or is it one step forward, two steps back? At the end of the day you're playing a blurfest with lots of artifacts just to 'pay' for slightly better lighting. More often than not barely of notable impact.

AMD did nothing special here, they just released solid GPUs, although I do agree RDNA3 was priced over the top at the beginning.

 

[redeye]

Really because Nvidia had a 8800 GPU. And numbers of a product might be “trademarked” in the same industry…
OTOH, can not see how someone could confuse an Nvidia 8800 from 20 years ago for an AMD 8800 … but trademarks, and not worth fighting Nvidia / “leather jacket” (ooh, sounds like a slasher film, lol) over a model number…

 

[inquisitor1]

It's simple and clear.

HAHAHAHA....sure

>and XTXXTX bullshit suffixes only help create sensory overdose

ill take no xt, xt, or xtx much easier to understand then intel. its not AT ALL easy to understand. do I need some aliexpress decoder to understand the abc/123 of intel cards?

anyone looks at nvidia or amd can easily understand the ranks. the added abs is their feck up.

anyways, I do hope intel and amd push harder. productivity and RT is pronto.

 

[leonavis]

Hmm. I really hope AMD will make a good APU with x3D tech in the next 2 years. Would really like to get rid of the dGPU altogether.

 

[Taisho]

Marketing dept doesn't want you to compare the 8800XT to 7800XT. This naming makes so little sense. They could have waited until their UDNA architecture is out to make a completely new naming scheme. Start with 1xxx again.

Apple is keeping it simple for consumers. They start with 1 and add 1. Is this rocket science AMD?

Nah, they mainly don't want to repeat the failure of the 7000 series. All their models were much worse than their "corresponding" Nvidia parts. In AMD's position, to sell you need a combination of "a bit faster and a bit cheaper". More VRAM won't hurt either.

What does 500,- get you on Nvidia?
12GB.
Or 16GB on a 4060ti without bandwidth.

AMD losing the marketshare it has, realistically makes no sense, but that only shows if you can disconnect from the endless stream of DLSS/RT marketing.

If VRAM were the only thing that matters in GPUs, Intel Alchemist would be the bestseller. Nvidia is the ultimate choice for everyone with low knowledge or high expectations and the current market share shows that people are willing to pay a premium for that hassle-free experience.

I'm going with less impressive. AMD most likely spend minimal R&D for this outgoing architecture. Could end up a rebadge. Currently, AMD only cares about compute-based architectures.

If it doesn't have DDR7 or cost pennies it will flop... unless Nvidia ramps up the entry and midrange prices again.

 

[Tomorrow]

If it doesn't have DDR7 or cost pennies it will flop... unless Nvidia ramps up the entry and midrange prices again.

It does not have GDDR7. This much is certain. If it flops it wont be because the lack of G7, but because AMD's bizarre naming changes and likely too high of a initial price.

It will also not cost pennies. The only card that even claim to cost pennies these days is B580.
Everything else is overpriced for what they offer.

 

[Vayra86]

HAHAHAHA....sure

>and XTXXTX bullshit suffixes only help create sensory overdose

ill take no xt, xt, or xtx much easier to understand then intel. its not AT ALL easy to understand. do I need some aliexpress decoder to understand the abc/123 of intel cards?

anyone looks at nvidia or amd can easily understand the ranks. the added abs is their feck up.

anyways, I do hope intel and amd push harder. productivity and RT is pronto.

It would be very refreshing to see a GPU line up named like this

'Slow AF but your CPU has no IGP'
'Poor man's mid range'
'Mid range but low end before you know it'
'Mid range card, but wants to look high end'
'High end, but you could spend a bit more'
'Very high end, like 420 high, this is the shit baby'
'Enthusiast, where fools and money part'

If VRAM were the only thing that matters in GPUs, Intel Alchemist would be the bestseller. Nvidia is the ultimate choice for everyone with low knowledge or high expectations and the current market share shows that people are willing to pay a premium for that hassle-free experience.

Absolutely, we agree on that. That's why I don't buy Nvidia anymore, at least, for now.

 

[3valatzy]

Absolutely, we agree on that. That's why I don't buy Nvidia anymore, at least, for now.

I see, but the best is to buy... errr... nothing.
If AMD were about market share, they would call this thingie an RX 8500 XT, sell it for $200, and pray for TSMC wafer allocation, so that they can meet the demand, those will sell like hot cakes.

 

[Vayra86]

I see, but the best is to buy... errr... nothing.
If AMD were about market share, they would call this thingie an RX 8500 XT, sell it for $200, and pray for TSMC wafer allocation, so that they can meet the demand, those will sell like hot cakes,

I know, but after the 1080 for 6,5 years I figured it was about time I'm not the guy that gets everything that gets released I do that with games