Last Thursday, we finally had the authorization from AMD to show you the Radeon RX 7900 XT and RX 7900 XTX that have just arrived in the lab. Unfortunately, we informed you that for the complete test, you would have to wait. Well, good news, since the NDA for AMD’s two new graphics cards just ended.
Many of you are waiting for the performance of this new generation to know if AMD can keep up with NVIDIA’s RTX 4080 and if it is more interesting financially. We will try to answer these questions as best we can, even if you will see later on that some questions are still pending when we conclude this test.
A special thanks to AMD for making this Radeon RX 7900 XT and RX 7900 XTX available. You should also know that we have a partner card whose test will be published this Tuesday.
[nextpage title=”AMD RX 7900 XT and RX 7900 XTX:”]
Architecture:
This AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT and RX 7900 XTX are the first two cards that we will test and which benefit from the brand new RDNA3 architecture. This new architecture succeeds RDNA2 which was represented by the last high-end model, the RX 6950 XT. We also reviewed the Powercolor RX 6950 XT Liquid Devil.
The novelty of this architecture is the design based on the addition of MCD (Memory Cache Die), also called memory chiplets. This design with its two distinct parts reminds us of that of AMD processors. We find the GCD (Graphic Compute Die) engraved in 5 nm with a size of 300 mm ² and then five or six MCD (Memory Cache Die) also called memory chiplets that are engraved in 6 nm. Each one occupies a surface of 37 mm².
Bundle:
As you can see on the pictures below, the two boxes are almost identical. The most attentive will notice a slightly different visual that highlights the RGB backlight for the RX 7900 XTX version. The model number is located on the top left of the box whose dimensions are 350 x 185 x 80 mm.
On the back, no technical information but information about the Adrenaline Edition software. We are here on two boxes rather compact and which play on the sobriety. The opening is done by the front side and reveals directly the cards. We can also discover for both models the annotation: ” Welcome to the red team “.
The Radeon RX 7900 XTX version has a little extra since the card lifts up when the box is opened. By visually comparing the two cards, it is easy to spot where the RGB backlight inserts will be on the RX 7900 XTX.
These are the reference cards proposed by AMD as NVIDIA does with its Founders Edition. However, if on the green side only NVIDIA sells its Founders Edition, AMD offers its partners to buy this reference card and then resell it by simply adding their brand.
The cooling :
Our two reference cards have a cooling system consisting of three 92mm fans. The design of both reference cards is visually very pleasing with a touch of RGB backlighting, only on the RX 7900 XTX version. The RADEON logo will not light up when the graphics card is switched on, but the two areas around the central fan. Aesthetically, the two cards look very similar with a slight difference in color for the fairing.
These three fans are responsible for keeping the heat sink in contact with the graphics chip and the various PCB components cool. These fans have 9 blades and will remain at rest when the card is not solicited and conversely, become active again when the temperature requires it. As you can see, the hot air escapes only through the top edge of the board. The bracket is not perforated.
The back of the two cards is protected by an imposing black and rather thick backplate. It is the same on both models. Its role is to avoid the torsion of the PCB but it certainly also plays a role of thermal dissipation with probably the presence of pads between this one and the PCB. As you can see, the backplate joins the fan shroud, which gives the impression that the PCB is enclosed in a shell.
Regarding the thickness, our two samples are on 2.5 slots. The dimensions are slightly different with 276 x 113 mm for the RX 7900 XT and 287 x 123 mm for the RX 7950 XTX. No disassembly of the card since this information is still under NDA. We will have to wait a few more days to discover the radiator and the PCB of these Radeon RX 7900 XT and RX 7900 XTX.
Connectors :
To power these two cards, and this is excellent news, AMD has chosen to keep two 8-pin power connectors. AMD announces a consumption of 300 watts for the RX 7900 XT and 355 watts for the RX 7900 XTX. We also know that concerning the memory, AMD uses GDDR6 instead of GDDR6X for both cards, mainly because it consumes less power and is incidentally less expensive.
AMD has opted for DisplayPort 2.1 support on the RX 7900 XTX and RX 7900 XT. This means higher refresh rate support in 4K and 8K compared to the DisplayPort 1.4 port that NVIDIA uses on its latest RTX 4000 series cards. AMD offers simultaneous encode or decode for AV1, which will be of interest to content creators. So we have two DisplayPort 2.1, one HDMI 2.1 and one USB Type-C port.
[nextpage title=”Specifications and PCB:”]
Technical specifications:
In terms of frequency, let’s start with the RX 7900 XT. The basic one is announced at 2025 MHz while the Boost is at 2499 MHz. The 20 GB of G-DDR6 memory runs at 2500 MHz (800 GB/s) on a 320 bit bus. As for the RX 7900 XTX, the basic one is announced at 2270 MHz while the Boost is at 2499 MHz. The 24 GB of G-DDR6 memory run at 2500 MHz (960 GB/s) on a 384 bit bus.
A small passage through GPU-Z to check that the information read is correct. Don’t forget that the latter will be superior during the benchmarks depending on the quality of your chip and the cooling system.
Let’s unpack the PCB:
The novelty of this architecture is the design based on the addition of MCD (Memory Cache Die), also called memory chiplets. This design with its two distinct parts reminds us of the AMD processors. The PCB below is the one of the Radeon RX 7900 XTX.
We find the GCD(Graphic Compute Die) engraved in 5 nm with a size of 300 mm ² and then five or six MCD (Memory Cache Die) also called memory chiplets that are engraved in 6 nm. Each one occupies a surface of 37 mm².
We have not yet received information from AMD regarding the number of phases of these two PCBs. We will update these specifications as soon as we receive them.
[nextpage title=”The test configuration: “]
Lately, we have once again updated all our graphics using the latest drivers from NVIDIA, AMD and of course Intel. We also took the opportunity to slightly modify our test configuration. So here we go again for a new series of tests and therefore of graphics on this slightly modified configuration:
- Motherboard : ROG Maximus Z690 APEX
- Processor : Intel Alder Lake i9-12900K
- Memory : 32 GB Corsair Vengeance 5600 CL38 DDR5
- Graphics Card: AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT and RX 7900 XTX
- Cooling system : ROG Ryujin II 360
- SSD : Western Digital Black SN750 2 TB + EKWB radiator
- Power supply: Corsair AX1600i + 12VHPWR 600W adapter
- Operating system : Windows 11 64 bits
For this test, we used a high-end configuration using an i9-12900K processor and DDR5. The use of a 144 Hz 4K display is also a prerequisite. For our tests we use a copy of the ROG PG27UQ.
The drivers used are NVIDIA 517.48 and AMD 22.9.2. For the two AMD cards, we used the press drivers in version 22.40.00.57
Our test protocol:
All cards are tested at stock frequencies and without any optimization. For the various benchmarks, whether synthetic or gaming, we will opt for 1080p, 1440p and 2160p resolutions depending on the card’s performance. Here, with this ultra high-end model, we will only use the 2160p definition since we will be comparing it mainly to NVIDIA’s RTX 4080 FE.
As you have seen, we have switched to Windows 11 and we have enabled in the BIOS, the ” ReSize BAR ” visible in GPU-Z. Now that you know everything about our test configuration, it’s time to start!
[nextpage title=”Synthetic benchmarks: “]
Our first series of tests will be dedicated to synthetic benchmarks. These are often used for overclocking competitions but are also very interesting to compare different GPUs. So we will focus on the 3DMark benchmarks.
We will test the following benchmarks:
- Fire Strike (1080p)
- Fire Strike Ultra (2160p)
- Time Spy (1440p)
- Time Spy Extreme (2160p)
- 3DMark Speed Way
- DirectX Raytracing
- Intel XeSS
- Mesh Shader
3DMark Fire Strike and Fire Strike Ultra :
Let’s start with 3DMark Fire Strike, which is one of the most used benchmarks today. It consists of two graphics tests, a CPU test and a fourth test that combines GPU and CPU. Don’t forget to deactivate the demo which doesn’t bring anything in the final score and prolongs the benchmark duration (unnecessarily). The version used for these tests is of course the latest one
First benchmark that we realize with these Radeon RX 7900 XT and RX 7900 XTX, and the least we can say is that it starts rather well! Let’s start with the RX 7900 XTX, which takes the lead over the NVIDIA RTX 4080 by 1230 points.
The RX 7900 XT is slightly behind the former top of the range of the previous generation at AMD, the RX 6950 XT. The increase in definition should reverse the trend. As a reminder, this benchmark is done in 1080p.
The same thing happens with Fire Strike Ultra, where our RX 7900 XTX is still in second place, but this time it’s widening the gap with the NVIDIA RTX 4080. Good news for our RX 7900 XT, which comes close to the green card. The Fire Strike benchmarks have always been good for AMD cards.
3DMark Time Spy and Time Spy Extreme:
The second test is 3DMark Time Spy. Although this one is done in 1440p, it has the particularity of using DirectX 12. It consists of two graphical tests and a CPU test. As for Fire Strike, don’t forget to disable the demo. These two first benchmarks are proposed by UL Benchmark.
The performance we get in Time Spy is often representative of what we will get in games. And here our two samples sandwich the RTX 4080. The first four cards from the new generation stand out against the previous generations. If the performance of two Radeon RX 7900s is confirmed, we may have excellent performance in games.
Under 3DMark Time Spy Extreme, the same is true even if the RX 7900 XT lags behind the RXT 4080. On the other hand, the RX 7900 XTX keeps its second place. As we can also see, the RTX 4090 is untouchable.
3DMark Speed Way
The latest benchmark from Ulbenchmark and it’s nice to be able to say that we’re going to have a good time on this Speed Way. It uses DirectX 12 and is by default in a 1440p definition. We have not modified anything and we use the original benchmark.
Here, both of our samples suffer more and for the first time our Radeon RX 7900 XTX is in third place. The benchmark uses Ray Tracing and seems to make our card suffer. We’ll see what happens in games. The RX 7900 XT is behind the RTX 3080 Ti.
3DMark DirectX Raytracing :
UL Benchmarks has added a new test to its series of benchmarks to measure Ray Tracing performance. The idea will be to use the 3DMark DirectX Raytracing test to compare the performance of Ray Tracing hardware dedicated to AMD and NVIDIA graphics cards but now also to Intel!
The 3DMark DirectX Raytracing test is designed to make Ray Tracing the limiting factor. Instead of relying on traditional rendering, the entire scene is traced and drawn in one pass. The test result will depend entirely on the performance of the Ray Tracing. It will be easy to measure and compare the performance of the different cards between them.
This benchmark has always been dominated by NVIDIA cards and we know that AMD cards will have more difficulties. However, we can see the progress of this new generation since the RX 7900 XTX is at the level of the RTX 3080 Ti but very far from the RTX 4080. We can really judge the impact of Ray Tracing during our gaming benchmarks.
3DMark Intel XeSS
UL Benchmarks in collaboration with Intel will add this new benchmark to the 3DMark suite. We had early access to this new test for our testing. This Intel XeSS test is designed to evaluate and compare the performance and image quality of XeSS(Xe Super Sampling). There are four XeSS modes to choose from: Ultra Quality, Quality, Balanced and Performance. The 3DMark inspection tool helps you compare image quality with a side-by-side view of XeSS rendering and native resolution rendering. You need a graphics card that supports Intel XeSS to run this test.
So we’ll have two scores, a FPS number with XeSS disabled and then on the right with XeSS enabled. The mode chosen is “Ultra Quality” which is actually the default mode for the benchmark.
In this new benchmark, the good news is that the two cards seem to take advantage of the Xe Super Sampling technology which allows to boost the performance. We will be able to judge its effect in the game Hitman 3 on our RX 7900 XT and RX 7900 XTX cards.
As we conclude this first series of synthetic tests, we are pleasantly surprised by the performance. The Radeon RX 7900 XTX seems to be ahead in benchmarks not using Ray Tracing but lags behind when it is active. We should have two performance cards in gaming and we will see how they will perform with Ray Tracing combined with FSR or XeSS.
[nextpage title=”Gaming performance in 2160p: “]
We decided to select six games because they seem to be representative enough. We have opted for DirectX12 and Vulkan with the following games:
- The Division 2 (DirectX 12)
- Borderlands 3 (DirectX 12)
- Red Dead Redemption II (Vulkan)
- Far Cry 6 (DirectX 12)
- Watch Dogs: Legion (DirectX 12)
- Cyberpunk 2077 (DirectX12)
We have chosen to use the benchmarks integrated in these different games.
Why did we do this? Simply to allow you to compare your results with ours if you also have a copy of one of these games. It’s a thought that seemed relevant to us and that will allow you to compare your results with ours.
As we mentioned on page 4 of this article, we have activated the Resizable Bar in the BIOS, which is now supported by all (recent) GPUs. Finally, we have opted only for 2160p definition and selected the cards that are able to compete at this level. Unfortunately, we don’t have any RTX 3080’s available at the moment to add performance to our graphics.
We also decided to harden the graphics quality of some games since the next generations should be more powerful, both from NVIDIA and from the next AMD graphics cards.
The Division 2:
The Division 2 will be tested under DirectX 12. As for the graphics settings, they will be set to ” ultra ” mode with vertical synchronization disabled.
Let’s go for the gaming part . First game of our series and it is rather beneficial to NVIDIA cards. Our RX 7900 XTX manages to stick to the RTX 4080 while our RX 7900 XT gets a performance close to the RTX 3090. We were hoping for better but as we reported, this game is more to the advantage of the greens.
Borderlands 3:
For the second game, we switch to Borderlands 3. The graphic options are set to ” Brutal “. It is important to know that Borderlands 3 is quite greedy and that this choice of parameters has a strong impact on the FPS. It is a game that is often praised in the announcements of new graphics cards and precisely in this Brutal mode.
Well, the trend changes here in Borderlands 3. We find a graph close to what we had under 3DMark Time Spy with our RTX 4080 sandwiched between the two AMD cards. The RX 7900 XTX takes a large lead over its direct competitor while the RX 7900 XT does almost as well as the RTX 4080. After the synthetic benchmarks, this is the kind of performance we expected. It remains to be seen if this will continue.
Red Dead Redemption 2:
Third game and not the least, Red Dead Redemption II on PC. The advantage of this opus is to offer the possibility to test the integrated benchmark under Vulkan. We opt for the graphics options in ” ultra “.
Third game and not the least, RDR2 offers the possibility to test the integrated benchmark under Vulkan. It is clear that we are on the same type of graphics as in the previous game. Our Radeon RX 7900 XTX manages to take the lead over the RTX 4080 and the RX 7900 XT manages to do as well.
Far Cry 6:
The latest game we are adding to this section is Far Cry 6, since it supports DXR as well as the FSR offered by AMD. We will also find it on the next page. For our benchmarks, we opted for ” ultra ” graphics quality.
Even if our file dedicated to this game has highlighted an advantage to AMD cards, our graphics remain identical in its construction. An RX 7900 XTX that performs better than the RTX 4080 and an RX 7900 XT that remain neck and neck with the green model. Note that the RTX 4090 remains untouchable.
Watch Dogs Legion:
Last but not least, Watch Dogs Legion will be used for our tests with Ray Tracing and DLSS. For our benchmarks, we have opted for an “ultra” graphic quality.
The trend is confirmed with the Watch Dogs Legion benchmark since the RX 7900 XT is still neck and neck with the RTX 4080 while the RX 7900 XTX takes second place in our graph.
Cyberpunk 2077:
This is a game that we have been wanting to add for a while and it is now done since it now has an integrated benchmark. We will also use this game for our tests with Ray Tracing. For our benchmarks, we have opted for an ” ultra ” graphic quality.
New and last benchmark of this panel of games. This is the one that shows the strongest performance with our graphics cards since few cards pass the 60 FPS mark. However, this is the first time that our RX 7900 XT manages to beat the RTX 4080.
Average Game:
For the average game performance, the NVIDIA RTX 3080 Ti is the reference card in 2160p. The other cards get a score either higher or lower depending on their performance against this model.
Our eyes will of course turn to the performance of our two samples against the NVIDIA RTX 4080. The RX 7900 XT surprised us, let’s face it. We thought we would have a lower performance than the 4080 and in many games it manages to come close to the green card. We could easily imagine it competing with an RTX 4070 when it becomes available.
As far as the RX 7900 XTX is concerned, there is no doubt that it performs much better than its direct competitor and takes a clear lead. The RTX 4090 remains a UFO and has not, at any time, been worried. We will wait for the conclusion and the Ray Tracing tests to give you our opinion on this new generation.
[nextpage title=”Ray tracing and DLSS/FSR performances:”]
Let’s now take a look at the five games we have selected that support Ray Tracing as well as DLSS and for some the FSR from AMD as well as the new XeSS technology from Intel and that is supported by Shadow Tomb Raider and Hitman 3. As we have already reminded you, if the DLSS remains the property of NVIDIA, the FSR and the XeSS can be used with all cards from AMD, Intel and even NVIDIA. This is an important notion to remember before starting the tests.
The six DirectX 12 games that we will test with Ray Tracing and DLSS, FSR or XeSS are :
- Shadow of the Tomb Raider (DLSS)
- Watch Dogs: Legion (DLSS)
- Metro Exodus PC Enhanced Edition (DLSS)
- Far Cry 6 (DLSS – FSR)
- Cyberpunk 2077 (DLSS – FSR)
- Hitman 3 (DLSS – XeSS)
No change for this new series of games since we stay in the 2160p definition. Depending on the card, we will use DLSS for NVIDIA and either FSR or XeSS for AMD models. If FSR is not available in a game, then we will use XeSS on our AMD card.
Shadow of the Tomb Raider:
The first one we add to this comparison that supports Ray Tracing and DLSS 2.0. Three levels of Ray Tracing are offered in the game (medium – high – ultra) and the four levels of DLSS (performance – quality – balanced – ultra performance).
For our benchmarks, we opted for ” ultra ” graphics quality, ” ultra ” Ray Tracing and ” performance ” DLSS or XeSS.
With the Ray Tracing activated in ultra, our two samples easily manage with averages of 72 and 85 FPS. There is no FSR technology in Shadow of The Tomb Raider, but XeSS has recently been introduced. Even if this technology is aimed at Intel cards, our RX 7900 XT and RX 7900 XTX can take advantage of it to boost performance. This game is therefore a formality for our two AMD cards.
Watch Dogs Legion:
Second game, Watch Dogs Legion supports Ray Tracing and DLSS 2.0. It is one of the most demanding games of the moment. Three levels of Ray Tracing are offered in the game (medium – high – ultra) and four levels of DLSS (performance – quality – balanced – ultra performance).
For our benchmarks, we opted for ultra graphics quality, ” ultra ” Ray Tracing and ” performance ” DLSS.
The Ray Tracing in Watch Dogs Legion makes all cards suffer except for our two models. This is the test par excellence that will highlight the difficulties of AMD cards. The activation of Ray Tracing will not allow us to play in good conditions since the average FPS is far too low. So, yes, we could also have opted for a ” lighter ” Ray Tracing but that’s not the idea here. Without the presence of FSR or XeSS technologies, most 2160p games with active Ray Tracing will be unplayable for our RX 7900 XT or RX 7900 XTX. The only solution will be to go down to a lower definition.
Metro Exodus PC Enhanced Edition:
Third game and supports DLSS 2.0. We have dedicated a file to it. Three levels of Ray Tracing are offered in the game and four levels of DLSS (performance – quality – balanced – ultra performance).
For our benchmarks, we opted for ultra graphics quality, ” high ” Ray Tracing and DLSS in ” performance ” mode.
The same case here in Metro Exodus PC as for Watch Dogs Legion. The conclusions are the same and without appeal.
Far Cry 6:
The latest game we add to this section since it supports DXR as well as FSR proposed by AMD.
For our benchmarks, we opted for Ultra graphics quality, we enabled both DRX options as well as FSR in ” performance ” mode.
In Far Cry 6, FSR is the only choice available to boost FPS after enabling Ray Tracing. All our cards can benefit from it, regardless of the manufacturer. So this is a case where even NVIDIA graphics cards will benefit from a performance boost.
The FSR is still to the advantage of AMD cards and our graphic uses the same construction as in our 2160p games with the RTX 4080 sandwiched between the RX 7900 XT and RX 7900 XTX.
Cyberpunk 2077:
New game that we added and that proposes in its parameters the activation of the DLSS but also the FSR.
For our benchmarks, we have chosen a “high” graphic quality, an ” ultra” Ray Tracing and a ” balanced ” DLSS/FSR.
This is the most demanding game where our cards have a hard time keeping up. Here, it’s violent for our AMD models that struggle to keep up. We also had a hard time testing the previous generation (RX 6000). Cyberpunk 2077 benefits from FSR 2.1 and allows our RX 7900 XTX to get close to the symbolic 60 FPS mark. We will have to be less greedy in terms of graphic parameters so that the RX 7900 XT can also reach the average of 60 FPS.
Note that FRS 2.1 boosts our performance by 177% and DLSS 2.0 by 171%. The two technologies are therefore quite close in terms of gains.
Hitman 3:
Last game also added since it is now compatible with DLSS, FSR and XeSS technology. Depending on the model of the tested card, we opt for one of these three technologies.
For our benchmarks, we opted for “high” graphics quality, ” enabled ” Ray Tracing and ” performance ” DLSS/Xess.
We find a situation close to the previous game with our two cards suffering when Ray Tracing is enabled. Fortunately Hitman 3 also benefits from FSR 2.0 and allows our two samples to easily pass the 60 FPS mark with an average of 72.4 FPS for the RX 7900 XT and 82.1 FPS for the RX 7900 XTX.
So Ray Tracing with these Radeon RX 7900 XT and RX 7900 XTX:
The conclusion is quite simple. It will be very difficult to enjoy the 2160p definition with active Ray Tracing if the game doesn’t have XeSS or FSR technologies. If this is the case, even if our two cards suffer, it will be possible to reach the 60 FPS mark quite easily.
This new generation of RX 7900 XT(X) improves and manages to handle Ray Tracing better. AMD must make the effort so that the next big games can integrate their house technology, i.e. the FidelityFX Super Resolution. We also notice that overall the DLSS is more efficient than the two other technologies proposed by AMD and Intel. Let’s also remember that we are using DLSS 2 here and that we could see that DLSS 3 allows even better gains in terms of FPS.
[nextpage title=”Temperature and power consumption: “]
Temperature:
In order to measure the temperatures, we opted for the Superposition stress test in Extreme mode. We opted for three 5 minutes runs with 10 minutes interval between each test. We took advantage of this benchmark to measure the power consumption of the graphics card for the table above.
In order to know the temperature in Idle, after having finished the three loops of the stress test, we let the card rest for 20 minutes before reading the temperature. It should be taken into account that most of the cards have the “0 dBa” technology and therefore, the fans turn off below a certain temperature, often between 50 and 55°C. This means that it takes longer to dissipate the heat after a period of stress testing or gaming. A card without this technology will be noisier than others at rest. Small reminder: our temperature readings are taken in Open-Air. In a closed case, the cards will necessarily be hotter.
As we expected, the temperatures are very good and very well contained despite the fact that the heat is only evacuated by the upper part of our graphics cards. Our measurements are made outside the case for all the cards. However, you should be careful to have a good air circulation inside your case since the heat will be evacuated inside the case.
Power Consumption (full configuration):
We use a wattmeter to measure the power consumption on the output of our power supply. Our modular power supply is a CORSAIR AX1600i. The result we propose is the average of the total consumption of our configuration. Only the graphics card changes between each reading. It is therefore easy to calculate the difference between each graphics card.
The least pleasant surprise of our test of this new generation is the power consumption of our two samples. Even if it improves compared to the RX 6950 XT, we are above 400 watts. So, in pure gaming, the RX 7900 XTX performed better than the RTX 4080 but we would have liked to have a more controlled power consumption as it was the case for the NVIDIA card.
[nextpage title=”Overclocking:”]
As I have implied during this article, I am eager to start overclocking and see how far our AMD cards are able to go. The performance is already very interesting in benchmarks and in games, but you’re getting to know us, we can’t get enough of it. On top of that, the card has a cooling system that seems to do the job, so that’s a great thing.
Step 1: Benchmark scores
Of course, it is important to know the scores we obtained on the Time Spy benchmark as well as the maximum boost frequency reached. This will allow us to have the reference scores and thus be able to judge the gains in overclocking.
As we can see, the graphic score is 29864 points, this is what we will try to improve by increasing the frequency of the GPU and memory.
Step 2: OC via RADEON drivers
For the overclocking of these two Radeon RX 7900 XT(X), we will use the RADEON drivers to make the modifications. It is thus by using the AMD drivers, via the interface drivers – performance – setting – manual setting, that we will begin the overclocking. As a reminder, we are going to act on the GPU frequency, on the memory frequency, on the memory latency and on the power limit, here on this model of 15%.
It is from here that we will be able to apply all our modifications.
We take the same and start again..
Yes, as I expected, our performance was again limited by the power limit of the card. To make it simple, from a certain frequency, and even if it is stable, the performances are less good. Look on this picture, the Boost frequency reaches 2859 MHz and yet my graphic score is only 27661 points while at the origin, without overclocking, it is 29864 points!
We will have to wait for less restricted BIOS or use More Power Tool when it will be compatible with this new generation. In the meantime, here is the best score we could get by choosing a frequency between 2650 and 2750 MHz with the memory at 2600 MHz.
The graphic score goes from 29864 points to 30937 points. In games, this allows us a gain of only 3 to 4%. It’s a pity to limit the card in this way, but it leaves a possibility for AMD to offer a RX 7950 XTX for example.
[nextpage title=”The last word:”]
The return of AMD in the race ?
Yes, clearly. But to be honest, I had some doubts when the RX 7900 XT(X) was presented, since AMD had presented very few graphics showing the performance of its cards against the competition. However, AMD is there and manages to impose itself largely thanks to its RX 7900 XTX which shows itself more powerful than its main competitor. As we have seen, in 2160p definition, there is nothing to debate.
Now yes, once we activate Raytracing in 2160p, our two samples suffer and if the game doesn’t have FSR or XeSS technologies, it will be a waste to be able to enjoy this definition. You’ll have to do without Ray Tracing or go back down to 1440p. Now, in the opposite case, it will be possible to reach 60 FPS by making sometimes a little compromise and sometimes none in order to enjoy the best graphic quality! However, we also noticed that DLSS is the most interesting in terms of performance when Ray Tracing is activated.
AMD still has a card to play in the next few weeks when its “Ryzen 7000X3D” processor will be available, which should bring a gain in performance when combined with an AMD GPU. We will make a series of comparative tests when it will be available in all logic for early 2023.
The price, always the price
Not to change, this is the one that will have a (psychological) impact on sales. NVIDIA offers its RTX 4080 Founders Edition at 1399 euros (1199$ announced) currently. The brand has lowered its price since the euro has regained some strength against the dollar. So, when is it on the side of AMD?
AMD France informs us that the official prices in France including VAT will be 1059.99 euros for the RX 7900 XT (899$ announced) and 1159.99 euros (999$ announced). First observation, the conversion rate is identical to that proposed by NVIDIA, that is to say an additional cost of more or less 17% compared to the price in dollars. Those who were hoping to see a card under the 1,000 euro mark will be disappointed. Advantage to the reds who offer a cheaper solution to take full advantage of the 2160p definition. Now, beware, as we have seen, things get complicated when Ray Tracing is activated. For us, cards at this price cannot do without Ray Tracing, it would be really unacceptable to do without it. The RTX 4080 will allow you to make no compromises, while the RX 7900 XTX will force you to go down to 1440p if the game has neither FSR nor XeSS.
Finally, AMD offers a more compact card with an excellent cooling system and a design that we like. Moreover, the presence of classic 8-pin connectors may reassure potential buyers in view of the problems NVIDIA had with its 12VHPWR adapter, although the situation now seems to be under control.
We said in the introduction that there was still one unknown at the time of concluding our article. It is of course the stocks. Does AMD have enough cards for the launch? Unfortunately, all our little ears tend to tell us that this will not be the case. One thing is for sure, if you’re interested in these cards, you’ll have to head over to the AMD shop right away. We received other information this morning that seems a little less alarmist but to be taken with a pinch of salt.
We liked:
- Two cards to take full advantage of 2160p
- A RX 7900 XTX more powerful than the RTX 4080 without Ray Tracing
- A well designed power supply with quality components
- The use of classic 8-pin connectors
- Excellent cooling system
- The very reliable noise levels
- The quality of the card’s design
- The possibility of partners to sell this “reference” card
- AMD’s return to a level close to that of NVIDIA
- A price that seems to us coherent with the competition
We would have liked :
- Not to find ourselves once again with a card limited in overclocking!
- A better control of the power consumption
- Even more games supporting FSR
We have mixed feelings when it comes to the performance of this new AMD generation and we can’t decide between gold and silver. The excellent 2160p performance combined with a very well designed, quiet and perfectly cooled card makes us opt for the gold award. However, the Ray Tracing will disturb our opinion if the chosen game does not have FSR or XeSS. It is then simply impossible to enjoy it completely and we have to switch back to 1440p. Small disappointment also at the level of the overclocking which is almost inexistent since we reach very quickly the limits of power of the card as well as at the level of the consumption that we would have liked more contained. Thanks to AMD for providing the two samples.