• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Sapphire Radeon RX 7700 XT Pure

W1zzard

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
May 14, 2004
Messages
28,668 (3.74/day)
Processor Ryzen 7 5700X
Memory 48 GB
Video Card(s) RTX 4080
Storage 2x HDD RAID 1, 3x M.2 NVMe
Display(s) 30" 2560x1600 + 19" 1280x1024
Software Windows 10 64-bit
Sapphire's Radeon RX 7700 XT Pure comes with a great-looking white cooler design that makes it a top choice for every white build. Compared to the Pulse you get a more powerful cooler that has three fans instead of two, with whisper-quiet noise levels and good temperatures.

Show full review
 
It's your finger on the die shot or it came like that from the factory? :D
 
That OC graph is remarkable. It shows that the core clock is'nt in effect in higher performance when oc'ing, it's purely memory bandwidth. This pulse OC'ed at avg 3.05Ghz scores less then a reference AMD card at avg 2.7Ghz.

It's such a weird launch - i'd say the 6700XT still holds this crown value in regards of performance, features and in particular the use of MorePowerTools thats not functional on these 7x00 series.
 
The memory clock for video playback is ridiculous. Let's hope they will fix it, because it's unbearable. :banghead:

1694804633173.png


1694804662563.png


36 watts is not ok.

When the RX 6700 XT does it in only 16 watts.

1694804710992.png


And RX 6600 XT does it in only 10 watts.

1694804748656.png
 
This card shouldn't exist; it's the castrated version of the 7800XT that loses too much performance to justify the price, or the capability of the cooler strapped to it.

When the 7700XT falls to $399, this model will still be a hard sell because it's still going to have that $20 premium and the only reason you'd be looking at a 7700XT is because the budget is already tight, likely ruling out premium versions of any SKU.

The review is helpful though, as it's the first proper teardown I've seen of the Sapphire PURE cooler and that's just about guaranteed to be identical for the 7800XT PURE.
 
That OC graph is remarkable. It shows that the core clock is'nt in effect in higher performance when oc'ing, it's purely memory bandwidth. This pulse OC'ed at avg 3.05Ghz scores less then a reference AMD card at avg 2.7Ghz.

It's such a weird launch - i'd say the 6700XT still holds this crown value in regards of performance, features and in particular the use of MorePowerTools thats not functional on these 7x00 series.
There's no reference card in the overclocking table. It still gets about 15% additional performance after overclocking so it's making good use of the additional clock.
 
This card shouldn't exist; it's the castrated version of the 7800XT that loses too much performance to justify the price, or the capability of the cooler strapped to it.

When the 7700XT falls to $399, this model will still be a hard sell because it's still going to have that $20 premium and the only reason you'd be looking at a 7700XT is because the budget is already tight, likely ruling out premium versions of any SKU.

The review is helpful though, as it's the first proper teardown I've seen of the Sapphire PURE cooler and that's just about guaranteed to be identical for the 7800XT PURE.
You probably underestimate the budget restricted pc owners/builders/users. Once this GPU drops to $400 or below, it will sell faster than produced. And after a few days, not even weeks, nVidia will start to heavily discount 4060Tis. Just a simple prediction based on market's product positioning of today.
 
Thanks for the review @W1zzard . I hope you had a great vacation. Adding the average clock for the benchmark used to measure overclocking to the "Energy Efficiency" section would help to see how much the clock increased by in that particular case.
 
This card shouldn't exist; it's the castrated version of the 7800XT that loses too much performance to justify the price, or the capability of the cooler strapped to it.

When the 7700XT falls to $399, this model will still be a hard sell because it's still going to have that $20 premium and the only reason you'd be looking at a 7700XT is because the budget is already tight, likely ruling out premium versions of any SKU.

The review is helpful though, as it's the first proper teardown I've seen of the Sapphire PURE cooler and that's just about guaranteed to be identical for the 7800XT PURE.
I think that's a little harsh. The 7700xt is the speed of a 6800, which was $580 at launch. It's about 15-20% faster then the 6700xt, a $480 part. It really only looks bad due to the 7800xt's price being good, the same problem the 7900 xt had.

At $399 its a decent improvement over the previous generation in perf/$. Compared to the garbage 8GB nvidia options it's the only viable mid ranger out there.
 
580€ in Germany... Ridiculous.
For 450€ I would probably order it. For 400€ without delay. But for 500+ I just won't.
 
Not all that bad. 7700 with OC is a 4070. not to mention in starfield. 499 in Ger actually, 529, 569 for pusle and nitro. But yeah that's insane and MLid said there is enough supply. 7800 Xt at 599 only lasted a day and that leaves 7700 as the only alternative for the same price.
 
I think that's a little harsh. The 7700xt is the speed of a 6800, which was $580 at launch. It's about 15-20% faster then the 6700xt, a $480 part. It really only looks bad due to the 7800xt's price being good, the same problem the 7900 xt had.

At $399 its a decent improvement over the previous generation in perf/$. Compared to the garbage 8GB nvidia options it's the only viable mid ranger out there.
IMO we shouldn't be using MSRPs to compare anything these days; Their relevance went out of the window back in 2017 with the first ETH mining boom. There have been different EXTERNAL factors to the GPU market that impacted price wildly since 2017, and unlike the relative stability of GPU pricing for the two decades before that, the last 6 years have seen three major events that have caused price swings of insane magnitude. It was normal (I didn't say it was a good idea) to buy and sell RX 5700 cards for over $1000 for the best part of a year in 2020. That had a 2019 MSRP of $349. Same deal for 3080 and 3090 cards - their MSRP was meaninglessly low, and then briefly made sense in comparison to the actual selling prices earlier this year - two years too late for the MSRP to mean anything.

An MSRP is only valid as a snapshot of the market pricing at that point in time. A 6800 at $580 ETH-boom pricing today is a rip-off, nobody would touch it, and it would get left on shelves, making its launch MSRP invalid in the current market.

The current sale price of a brand new 6800 is $430 because that is what people are willing to pay for them. At $470 this 7700XT is just 6% cheaper than several decent 7800XT cards, which are 15-20% faster and have better performance/Watt. 6% isn't enough of a discount to make anyone even blink, If they can afford the $20 premium over the 7700XT base model, they can definitely afford to just get a 7800XT in the first place!
 
I think that's a little harsh. The 7700xt is the speed of a 6800, which was $580 at launch. It's about 15-20% faster then the 6700xt, a $480 part. It really only looks bad due to the 7800xt's price being good, the same problem the 7900 xt had.

At $399 its a decent improvement over the previous generation in perf/$. Compared to the garbage 8GB nvidia options it's the only viable mid ranger out there.

What about compared to the 16 GB options? 12 GB vs 16 GB is also not desirable.

The RX 6800 16GB is a better buy because of the VRAM longevity, future proofing and fine wine.

12 GB is also garbage. Especially that there are 24GB, 20GB and 16GB options.

12 GB is 50% of 24 GB, so today having a card with 12 GB is like it was with having a 4 GB card when the 8 GB cards were top notch.
 
Last edited:
Not all that bad. 7700 with OC is a 4070. not to mention in starfield. 499 in Ger actually, 529, 569 for pusle and nitro. But yeah that's insane and MLid said there is enough supply. 7800 Xt at 599 only lasted a day and that leaves 7700 as the only alternative for the same price.

yeah Starfield is great. it's what pushed me over the edge in getting my 7900 XT, no regrets, been rock solid and having a blast all summer.
 
it is a pretty solid product, just priced too high, 400 euro with a game (but rather not starfield....) and it would be a pretty solid purchase.

Though personally I would want to see it even lower, 380 - 360 or so.
 
Man, AMD is really stuck in the stoneage when it comes to efficiency.
 
Man, AMD is really stuck in the stoneage when it comes to efficiency.

its a matter of money. Nvidia could be even more efficient with a refresh of 3nm gpu ti versions next year, but they can't, cause Apple bought all the 3nm node from TSMC for next year. same goes for AMD, Nvidia is richer company and bought all the 4nm node, so they had to stick with 5 and 6nm.

It's all just who is richest and can get best node first from TSMC, that's all this is from what I can observe anyway.
 
its a matter of money. Nvidia could be even more efficient with a refresh of 3nm gpu ti versions next year, but they can't, cause Apple bought all the 3nm node from TSMC for next year. same goes for AMD, Nvidia is richer company and bought all the 4nm node, so they had to stick with 5 and 6nm.

It's all just who is richest and can get best node first from TSMC, that's all this is from what I can observe anyway.

The "best node" can be neutralised by good pricing. If they offer 6nm and 5nm chips, then price them accordingly. As everyone already said - AMD's prices are too high for what it's worth.
 
What about compared to the 16 GB options? 12 GB vs 16 GB is also not desirable.

The RX 6800 16GB is a better buy because of the VRAM longevity, future proofing and fine wine.

12 GB is also garbage. Especially that there are 24GB, 20GB and 16GB options.

12 GB is 50% of 24 GB, so today having a card with 12 GB is like it was with having a 4 GB card when the 8 GB cards were top notch.
That's not how VRAM works.

8GB of VRAM is insufficient for modern games. We have seen multiple games in which 8GB cards have severe stuttering issues, failure to load textures, and other major issues that do not affect 16, 12, or even 10GB cards.

Consoles play a major factor in this. The xbox series X is the baseline, with 10GB of high speed RAM. This will largely be used for graphics, where the smaller 6GB "slow" ram will be used more for system processes, audio, ECE. This is why the 10GB 3080s are still working pretty well. Until the series X is replaced, the 12GB cards of today will be sufficient. The same way 512MB cards were fine with games at 720p, and 1GB cards were plentiful for 1080p, until the PS4/xbone came out. The only time 10GB cards have shown to be insufficient was at 4k, which is a higher rez then consoles run at.

Buying 16GB over 12GB, for 1080p/1440p is rather pointless today, as 12GB cards are not running out of VRAM and wont for this console generation. And before you go "but muh series S" yes, that only has 8GB, and games on that console typically run like total trash compared to series X, with sub 1080p resolution with dithering, poor framerates, and muddy textures.

So yeah. 12GB is fine. And the 7700xt is a 6700xt replacement, which was a 12GB card.
IMO we shouldn't be using MSRPs to compare anything these days; Their relevance went out of the window back in 2017 with the first ETH mining boom. There have been different EXTERNAL factors to the GPU market that impacted price wildly since 2017, and unlike the relative stability of GPU pricing for the two decades before that, the last 6 years have seen three major events that have caused price swings of insane magnitude. It was normal (I didn't say it was a good idea) to buy and sell RX 5700 cards for over $1000 for the best part of a year in 2020. That had a 2019 MSRP of $349. Same deal for 3080 and 3090 cards - their MSRP was meaninglessly low, and then briefly made sense in comparison to the actual selling prices earlier this year - two years too late for the MSRP to mean anything.

An MSRP is only valid as a snapshot of the market pricing at that point in time. A 6800 at $580 ETH-boom pricing today is a rip-off, nobody would touch it, and it would get left on shelves, making its launch MSRP invalid in the current market.

The current sale price of a brand new 6800 is $430 because that is what people are willing to pay for them. At $470 this 7700XT is just 6% cheaper than several decent 7800XT cards, which are 15-20% faster and have better performance/Watt. 6% isn't enough of a discount to make anyone even blink, If they can afford the $20 premium over the 7700XT base model, they can definitely afford to just get a 7800XT in the first place!
That's a load of semantics that is totally pointless. The 6800 could jump up in price tomorrow and make the whole conversation moot. Which is why MSRPs are used for comparison.
 
Last edited:
12GB cards of today will be sufficient

12GB cards are not running out of VRAM and wont for this console generation

Wishful thinking without connection with the reality. You will not tell anyone how to use their cards and at what settings, ok?!

There are already games which require more than 12 GB of VRAM.

1694890480926.png


1694890523125.png

 
Wishful thinking without connection with the reality. You will not tell anyone how to use their cards and at what settings, ok?!

There are already games which require more than 12 GB of VRAM.

View attachment 314005

View attachment 314006
There is the nuance: AMD cards don't handle RT Overdrive, and without it, CP2077 consumes pretty well below 10 gigs. Especially if we talking resolutions and settings these AMD GPUs are capable of pushing beyond 60 FPS. 6700 XT, a 12 GB GPU, runs out of steam at ~7.2 GB VRAM usage (1440p Ultra).

Hogwarts Legacy is close to being unplayable on 7800 XT when the settings are tuned to consume more than 10 GB.

TLOUP1 is the only game which can be considered a VRAM hog and this is kinda misleading.

The 7700 XT's problem ain't 12 GB. It's narrow VRAM bus accompanied with relatively slow GDDR6 which cause 7700 XT to be much more than 9% (not 10% because clocks of 7700 XT are higher) slower than 7800 XT. You need more than 432 Gbps at 1440p. Much more.

the 7700xt is a 6700xt replacement
No, it's not. Based on price, it's a 6650 XT's replacement.
RX 7800 XT is a 6700 XT's replacement, according to $480 VS $500 price tags on them. Considering inflation, the newer one is even cheaper.
 
Last edited:
The "best node" can be neutralised by good pricing. If they offer 6nm and 5nm chips, then price them accordingly. As everyone already said - AMD's prices are too high for what it's worth.
What point are you trying to make, ARF?

They already are neutralised by good pricing! The $500 7800XT is comfortably ahead of the $600 4070, nipping at the heels of the $800 4070Ti, and that includes testing suites with several raytraced games, too.
The $450 7700XT is vastly superior to anything Nvidia offers at under $600, period.

The feature set arguments for Nvidia are also much weaker with the 7000-series; You get an AV1 encoder, improved HEVC and AVC encoder, HYPR-RX to compete with Reflex and Anti-Lag, FSR3 coming soon to let the 7000-series compete with DLSS3 Frame-gen. I have no doubt that the Nvidia versions of all these will be better, more mature offerings, but it's not like you're completely missing out on these things any more, and if the AMD equivalent is good enough, you really do have to ask yourself why the 4070Ti is selling for $300 more than the 7800XT, whilst still only giving you 12GB VRAM.

That's a load of semantics that is totally pointless. The 6800 could jump up in price tomorrow and make the whole conversation moot. Which is why MSRPs are used for comparison.
We'll agree to disagree then.

MSRPs were all utter nonsense for the entirety of 2020, 2021, and 2022. If you want to use them, fine - but I'll continue to use the actual price things can be bought and sold for.
 
Back
Top