It’s a busy day for us at the end of the NDA, with no less than four tests of the new AMD cards, the RX 7700 XT and RX 7800 XT, which we presented to you a few days ago. We’ll be reviewing AMD’s reference model, the RX 7800 XT, as well as the TUF Gaming RX 7700 XT OC, TUF Gaming RX 7800 XT OC and Powercolor’s Red Devil RX 7800 XT. So it’s time for our first test with AMD’s benchmark board.
This card is aimed at the mid-range 1440p 60 FPS segment, with an MSRP of $499. This could be an excellent price if you’re looking to upgrade your old GPU. The AMD RX 7800 XT is a direct competitor to the NVIDIA RTX 4070. We’ll find out for sure in our test.
We’ve taken advantage of this article to redo all our tests with the latest drivers available from NVIDIA, AMD and Intel. As you can see from our test protocol, all our graphics have just been updated!
Special thanks to AMD for making this Radeon RX 7800 XT available.
[nextpage title=”AMD RX 7800 XT:”]
Architecture:
This AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT is the fourth card in our hands to benefit from the brand-new RDNA3 architecture. This new architecture succeeds RDNA2, which was represented in particular by the latest high-end model, the RX 6950 XT. AMD has chosen to launch its two top-of-the-range models directly, as NVIDIA has done with its RTX 4090. AMD had and still has stocks of cards from the previous generation, hence this choice of launch.
On the other hand, with this RX 7800 XT, we’re in a “mid-range” offering for 1440p 60 FPS definition. The RX 7700 XT version is also aimed at this definition, but at a lower price. We’ll be able to judge the difference in performance in the tests published today.
We’ve taken the table provided by our VideoCardz colleagues, which lists the characteristics of the various GPUs built around RDNA3. The RX 7800 XT uses the entire GPU chip named Navi 32 XT, with 60 CUs, 128 AI Accelerators, 16 GB GDDR6 memory clocked at 19.5 Gbps on a 256-bit bus. It should be noted, however, that the RX 7800 XT has fewer cores than the last-generation RX 6800 XT, which had 72 CUs. This should have an impact on performance between the two models.
As for the RX 7000 generation, the range is now complete, and AMD has no plans to release further cards based on this architecture. It remains to be seen whether other cards will be added for the RTX 4000 on the green side.
The bundle:
As you can see from the photos below, the box containing our copy of AMD’s RX 7800 XT has the same layout as the other three cards. The model number can be found at the top left of the box, which measures 320 x 170 x 75 mm. We’re talking about compact packaging, which is good news for the size of the card.
There’s no technical information on the rear, but there is information about the Adrenaline Edition software. The front panel opens to reveal the card itself. As soon as you open it, you’ll see the annotation: ” Welcome to the red team “.
This is the reference card offered by AMD, as NVIDIA does with its Founders Edition. However, while on the green side only NVIDIA sells its Founders Edition, AMD offers its partners the opportunity to buy this reference board and then resell it by simply adding their brand. Unfortunately, it would seem that the cost of a sticker sometimes pushes up the price, as some brands do not hesitate to increase the price of the reference board even though it is totally identical to the one offered by AMD. Please note that AMD will not be offering a reference model for sale for the RX 7700 XT.
Cooling:
Our reference board features a cooling system consisting of two 80 mm fans. The reference board’s design is visually very pleasing, with no hint of RGB backlighting. Its dark aesthetic will match any motherboard and any case.
The two fans keep the heat sink in contact with the graphics chip and the various PCB components cool. These fans have 9 blades and remain at rest when the board is not in use, and vice versa. They become active again when the temperature requires it. As you can see, hot air only escapes through the top edge of the board, as the bracket is not perforated.
The rear of the board is protected by a thick black backplate. Its role is to prevent the PCB from twisting, but it also plays a role in heat dissipation, with the presence of pads between it and the PCB. As you can see, the backplate is joined to the fan shroud, giving the impression that the PCB is encased in a shell. We also note the presence of a small icon indicating that this is a hot surface. We’ll be able to judge the temperature of the latter during our tests. In terms of thickness, our sample occupies 2 slots.
Connectors :
To power our card, and this is excellent news, AMD has chosen to retain two 8-pin power connectors. AMD claims a power consumption of 263 watts for the reference RX 7800 XT. We also know that, as far as memory is concerned, AMD is using GDDR6 instead of GDDR6X for both boards, mainly because it consumes less power and is incidentally less expensive.
AMD has opted for DisplayPort 2.1 support on these new boards. AMD offers simultaneous encoding or decoding for AV1, which will be of interest to content creators. All in all, we have three DisplayPort 2.1s and one HDMI 2.1.
[nextpage title=”Specifications and PCB:”]
Technical specifications:
In terms of frequency, here’s that of our AMD RX 7800 XT reference board. The base board is rated at 2124 MHz, while the Boost is rated at 2430 MHz. The 16 GB of G-DDR6 memory run at 2438 MHz (624 GB/s) on a 256-bit bus. These frequencies correspond to those of the reference board, but we should have factory-overclocked boards from AMD’s partners, perhaps with higher frequencies. This will be the case with our two other RX 7800 XTs: the TUF Gaming RX 7800 XT OC and the Red Devil RX 7800 XT from Powercolor.
A quick trip to GPU-Z to check that the information read is correct. Don’t forget that the latter will be superior in benchmarks, depending on the quality of your chip and cooling system.
[nextpage title=”Test configuration: “]
As we said in the introduction, we’re (once again) busy updating all our graphics using the latest drivers from NVIDIA, AMD and now, of course, INTEL. We’ve also taken the opportunity to slightly modify our test configuration. So here we go again, with a new series of tests and graphics on this slightly modified configuration:
- Motherboard: ROG Maximus Z690 APEX
- Processor: Intel Alder Lake i9-12900K
- Memory : 32 GB Corsair Vengeance 5200 CL38 DDR5
- Graphics card: AMD RX 7800 XT
- Cooling system : Asus ROG Ryujin II 360
- SSD: Western Digital Black SN750 2 TB radiator EKWB
- Power supply: Corsair AX1600i adapter 12VHPWR 600W
- Operating system: Windows 11 64-bit
For this test, we used a high-end configuration featuring an i9-12900K processor and DDR5. The use of a 144 Hz 4K display is also a sine qua non. For our tests, we’re using the ROG PG27UQ.
As we said in the introduction to this article, all our tests have been redone over the last few days with all our cards and with the latest drivers available!
The drivers used are the latest for each manufacturer, with the Adrenalin-Edition 23.20.01.05 for testing these new boards.
Our test protocol:
All cards are tested at stock frequencies and without any optimization. For the various benchmarks, whether synthetics or games, we’ll opt for 1080p, 1440p and 2160p resolutions, depending on the card’s performance. Here, with this model, we’ll be using 1440p definitions for both rasterization and raytracing , as we feel this is the most appropriate.
As you can see, we’re now running Windows 11, and we’ve activated the ” ReSize BAR ” in the BIOS, which can be seen in GPU-Z. Now that you know everything about our test configuration, it’s time to get started!
Please note: the RX 6800 XT in our tests is the ROG RX 6800 XT LC Strix Gaming OC version, which benefits from a liquid cooling system and also boasts much higher frequencies than the reference card.
[nextpage title=”Synthetic benchmarks: “]
Our first series of tests is dedicated to synthetic benchmarks. These are often used for overclocking competitions, but are also very interesting for comparing different GPUs. We’ll be focusing on benchmarks from the 3DMark series.
We’ll be testing the following benchmarks:
- Fire Strike (1080p)
- Fire Strike Ultra (2160p)
- Time Spy (1440p)
- Time Spy Extreme (2160p)
- 3DMark Speed Way (1440p)
- DirectX Raytracing
- Intel XeSS
- 3DMark DLSS Feature Test (2160p)
3DMark Fire Strike and Fire Strike Ultra :
Let’s start with 3DMark Fire Strike, one of today’s most widely used benchmarks. 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 makes no contribution to the final score and prolongs the benchmark’s duration (unnecessarily). The version used for these tests is, of course, the latest.
Our first benchmark is with this AMD RX 7800 XT, and it gets off to a strong start, beating the RTX 4070 by 1370 points.
Under Fire Strike Ultra, the results are identical, but let’s not forget that the Fire Strike series of benchmarks is well in favor of AMD cards.
3DMark Time Spy and Time Spy Extreme:
The second test is 3DMark Time Spy. Although this one is performed in 1440p, its main feature is that it uses DirectX 12. It consists of two graphics tests and a CPU test. As with Fire Strike, don’t forget to disable the demo. The first two benchmarks are provided by UL Benchmark.
The performance obtained in Time Spy is often representative of what we’ll get in games. Here, our sample of the day scores 18928 points, putting it ahead of the RTX 4070, even if the difference is only 788 points. We should therefore have an RX 7800 XT ahead of the RTX 4070 in rasterized games.
Under 3DMark Time Spy Extreme, we achieved a good score of 8978 points, representing a 4.4% performance gain over NVIDIA’s RTX 4070.
3DMark Speed Way
Ulbenchmark’s latest benchmark, 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 defaults to 1440p. We haven’t modified anything, so we’re using the original benchmark.
Here, too, our AMD RX 7800 XT scores 3757 points, putting it behind the RTX 4070 for the first time. In this benchmark, NVIDIA cards fare best.
3DMark DirectX Raytracing:
UL Benchmarks has added a new test to its series of benchmarks for measuring ray tracing performance. The idea is to use the 3DMark DirectX ray tracing test to compare the performance of ray tracing hardware dedicated to graphics cards from AMD and NVIDIA, and now also from Intel!
The 3DMark DirectX ray tracing test is designed to make ray tracing the limiting factor. Instead of relying on traditional rendering, the entire scene is traced and drawn in a single pass. The test result will depend entirely on ray tracing performance. This makes it easy to measure and compare the performance of different cards.
This benchmark has always been dominated by NVIDIA cards, so our sample of the day logically lags behind, with a score of 31.6 FPS, which still puts it ahead of the previous generation, the RX 6800 XT.
3DMark Intel XeSS
UL Benchmarks, in collaboration with Intel, will be adding this new benchmark to the 3DMark suite. We had early access to this new test for our tests. 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 number of FPS with XeSS disabled and then, on the right, with XeSS enabled. The mode chosen is “Ultra Quality”, which is actually the benchmark’s default mode.
In this new benchmark, all graphics cards without exception benefit from XeSS, but it’s Intel that reaps the greatest gain. ARC models see a gain of 50%, while NVIDIA and AMD models see a gain of between 25 and 35%.
[nextpage title=”1440p gaming performance: “]
We decided to select six games as being sufficiently representative. We 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’ve chosen to use the built-in benchmarks for these games.
Why do we do this? Quite simply to enable you to compare your results with ours if you also own a copy of one of these games. It’s a thought-provoking idea that will enable 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. Last but not least, we’ve opted for 1080p and 1440p resolution only, which is what you’d expect from these cards.
The Division 2:
The Division 2 will be tested under DirectX 12. As far as graphics parameters are concerned, they will be set to ” ultra ” mode, with vertical synchronization deactivated.
First game and our AMD RX 7800 XT is slightly behind the RTX 4070 Founders Edition, at least for the reference card. Clearly, factory-overclocked models are slightly ahead of NVIDIA’s reference card.
Borderlands 3:
For the second game, we switch to Borderlands 3. Graphics options are set to ” Brutal “. It’s worth noting that Borderlands 3 is quite greedy, and this choice of settings has quite a strong impact on FPS. It’s a game that’s often praised in announcements of new graphics cards, and precisely in this Brutal mode.
Performance here is excellent, with our AMD RX 7800 XT outperforming the RTX 4070 in 1440p. The two factory-overclocked cards still manage to grab extra FPS.
Red Dead Redemption 2:
The third and by no means least important game, Red Dead Redemption II on PC. The advantage of this opus is the possibility of testing the integrated Vulkan benchmark. We opt for the ” ultra ” graphics options.
Third and by no means least, RDR2 offers the possibility of testing the integrated Vulkan benchmark. Performance is once again identical to what we’ve already experienced with our RX 7800 XTs ahead of the RTX 4070, with a gain of up to 8%. Note, however, that there are also factory-overclocked RTX 4070 cards, which could reduce the gap between the cards.
Far Cry 6:
Far Cry 6 supports DXR and SFR from AMD. You’ll find more on this on the next page. For our benchmarks, we opted for ” ultra” graphics quality.
Although our report on this game showed that the RX 6000 cards had the edge, our AMD RX 7800 XT once again came out on top, dominating not only the RTX 4070 but also and above all the previous-generation RX 6800 XT.
Watch Dogs Legion:
Last but not least, Watch Dogs Legion will also be used for our ray tracing tests. For our benchmarks, we have opted for ” very high” graphics quality.
In the Watch Dogs Legion benchmark, we are obliged to set the graphics quality to “very high” rather than “ultra”, as the benchmark then tells us that the 8 GB of memory is not enough. The situation remains the same with the RX 7800 XT in first place.
Cyberpunk 2077:
Here’s a game we’ve been wanting to add for a while, and now we’ve done it, with an integrated benchmark. We’ll also be using this game for our ray tracing tests. For our benchmarks, we’ve opted for “ultra” graphics quality.
New and final benchmark for this panel of games. At 1440p, we get an average of 94 FPS, which means we still have room to push a few graphics options!
Game average:
For the gaming average, the RTX 3070 was still the reference card in 1440p definition. Other cards score either higher or lower, depending on their performance against this model.
These are excellent results for the RX 7800 XT, which positions itself as the new queen of 1440p definition in rasterization, i.e. without enabling raytracing or DLSS/FSR in our games. This is what we’ll be assessing on the next page. If we weigh up the prices at this point in the article, the reference RX 7800 XT will be sold at 549 euros, while the RTX 4070 Founders Edition is priced at 659 euros. The price difference is therefore quite substantial, and in favor of the reds, if we stay with rasterization.
[nextpage title=”Ray tracing and DLSS/FSR 1440p performance:”]
Let’s take a look at the seven games we’ve selected that support ray tracing and DLSS, as well as AMD’s FSR for some of them, and Intel’s new XeSS technology, which is supported by Shadow Tomb Raider and Hitman 3. As we’ve already reminded you, while DLSS remains the property of NVIDIA, FSR and XeSS can be used with all cards from AMD, Intel and even NVIDIA.
The seven DirectX 12 games we’ll be testing with ray tracing and DLSS, FSR or XeSS are :
- ups of the Tomb Raider (DLSS)
- Watch Dogs: Legion (DLSS)
- Metro Exodus PC Enhanced Edition (DLSS)
- Far Cry 6 (DLSS – FSR)
- Cyberpunk 2077 (DLSS 3 – FSR)
- Hitman 3 (DLSS 3 – XeSS)
- Forza Horizon 5 (DLSS 3)
No change for this new series of games, as we’re sticking with 1080p definition. Depending on the card, we’ll be using DLSS for NVIDIA and either FSR or XeSS for AMD models. If FSR isn’t available in a game, then we’ll give our AMD card the benefit of XeSS technology.
DLSS 3: watch out for our results!
As you know, NVIDIA unveiled DLSS 3 with the arrival of the RTX 4000 graphics cards, and in particular with the launch of the RTX 4090 version. So why the warning? Because NVIDIA now offers DLSS 3 support on many games, but this is only supported by RTX 4000s. To put it simply, if we test a game that benefits from DLSS 3, our RTX 4060 Ti will take advantage of it, but an RTX 30xx will make do with DLSS 2, resulting in even greater discrepancies.
We currently have three games that support DLSS 3, and we’ll be increasing this number over the coming weeks. Updating all our graphics to 1080p and 1440p has taken us a long time. You can find the list of compatible games here.
Shadow of the Tomb Raider:
The first game we’ve added to this comparison supports ray tracing and DLSS 2.0. The game features three ray tracing levels (medium – high – ultra) and four DLSS levels (performance – quality – balanced – ultra performance).
For our benchmarks, we opted for ” very high ” graphics quality, ” ultra ” ray tracing and ” balanced ” DLSS.
With ray tracing set to ultra, an average of 103 FPS is achieved. Ray tracing performance is identical with the RTX 4070, but DLSS 2.0 proves far more interesting than FSR 1 in this game. The graphics speak for themselves.
Watch Dogs Legion:
The second game, Watch Dogs Legion supports ray tracing and DLSS 2.0. It proves to be one of the most demanding games of the moment. The game offers three levels of ray tracing (medium – high – ultra) and four levels of DLSS (performance – quality – balanced – ultra performance).
For our benchmarks, we opted for very high graphics quality, ” high ” Ray Tracing and ” balanced ” DLSS.
Our reference model in RX 7800 XT is starting to suffer slightly, although the 60 FPS barrier is still reached. In this game, there’s no FSR or XeSS to benefit AMD cards. It’s DLSS alone that enables the RTX 4070 to go from 69 to 101 FPS.
Metro Exodus PC Enhanced Edition:
Third game to support DLSS 2.0. The game features three ray tracing levels and four DLSS levels (performance – quality – balanced – ultra performance).
For our benchmarks, we opted for ultra graphics quality, ” ultra ” ray tracing and DLSS in ” balanced ” mode.
We continue with the greedy games and here a score of 58.6 FPS for our reference AMD RX 7800 XT. Both cards with factory overclocking manage to exceed 60 FPS. As with the previous game, with no upscaling technology to increase FPS for AMD cards, it’s all good for the RTX 4070.
Far Cry 6:
Far Cry 6 supports DXR as well as AMD’s FSR, but not DLSS.
For our benchmarks, we opted for Ultra graphics quality, activated both DRX options and FSR in ” balanced ” mode.
In Far Cry 6, FSR is the only choice available to boost FPS after enabling ray tracing. So all our cards can benefit, regardless of manufacturer. So our RX 7800 XTs manage to stay the course and take the lead again.
Cyberpunk 2077:
A new game we’ve added, with DLSS and FSR enabled in its settings. Note that this is the first game to enable DLSS3 for RTX 40xx graphics cards.
For our benchmarks, we opted for “high” graphics quality, “medium” Ray Tracing and ” balanced ” DLSS/FSR.
This is the most demanding game, where our cards have great difficulty keeping up. Here, an average of 38.1 FPS is achieved. FSR 2.1 works perfectly here, as we almost manage to reach 63.9 FPS when activated. The RTX 4070 fares better with Ray Tracing, but with the new DLSS 3, FPS figures soar. It’s about time AMD rolled out its FSR 3.0.
Hitman 3:
Hitman 3 is now compatible with DLSS, FSR and XeSS technology. Depending on the model of card tested, we opt for one of these three technologies.
For our benchmarks, we opted for “high” graphics quality, ” enabled ” Ray Tracing and ” balanced ” DLSS/Xess.
The situation is the same as with our AMD RX 7800 XT, which is below 60 FPS with Ray Tracing enabled, but which gains a significant number of additional FPS thanks to FSR. Even so, the RTX 4070 is still the best performer.
Forza Horizon 5:
The latest game to be added to our panel, as it is now compatible with DLSS 3 technology. For our benchmarks, we opted for ” extreme ” graphics quality, ” extreme ” Ray Tracing and ” balanced ” DLSS/Xess.
This new game, which also supports DLSS 3 as well as XeSS and FSR 2.2. This is the game that will enable our AMD RX 7800 XT to go from 124 FPS to 126 FPS when activated. Strangely, the gain is non-existent when the game is up to date. On the NVIDIA side, DLSS 3 still shows its potential.
Then there’s ray tracing with the AMD RX 7800 XT :
In our seven games tested, our RX 7800 XT almost always manages to hang on to the 60 FPS average, and if it doesn’t, FSR or XeSS are there to ensure it. Overall, we can see that in this type of test, the RTX 4070 is more at ease, especially with DLSS, which is uncompromising when it comes to version 3.0.
[nextpage title=”Temperature, power consumption and nuisances: “]
Temperature:
To record temperatures, we opted for the Superposition stress test in Extreme mode. We opted for three 5-minute runs with 10-minute intervals between each test. We took advantage of this benchmark to record the graphics card’s power consumption for the table above.
To find out the Idle temperature, after completing the three stress test loops, we let the card rest for 20 minutes before taking the temperature reading. Bear in mind that most boards benefit from “0 dBa” technology, so the fans cut out below a certain temperature, often between 50 and 55°C. It therefore takes longer to dissipate heat after a period of stress testing or gaming. A card that does not benefit from this technology will be noisier than others at rest. A quick reminder: our temperature readings are taken in Open-Air. In a closed case, the cards will inevitably be warmer.
Boom, it’s just as I feared: the temperatures are really very high, probably due to the design of our reference RX 7800 XT. We think that a bracket with apertures and a perforated backplate would have reduced the temperature. As a reminder, these measurements are taken outside the case, and we imagine that they will be even higher inside a case. In a few days’ time, we’ll come back to the question of how to optimize the card’s cooling.
The other two RX 7800 XTs with “in-house” cooling systems are, of course, more efficient. It remains to be seen what the asking price will be for these custom models.
Power consumption (full configuration):
We use a wattmeter to measure power consumption at the output of our PSU. Our modular power supply is a CORSAIR AX1600i. The result is the average total power consumption of our configuration. Only the graphics card changes between each reading. So it’s easy to calculate the difference between each graphics card.
Good news as far as power consumption is concerned. Even though it’s much higher than the RTX 4070, it’s lower than the RX 6800 XT, and therefore improving. As a reminder, this is the total power consumption of our configuration. Of course, we’d have liked an even better result, but that doesn’t seem to be a negative point.
[nextpage title=”The final word: “]
The 7800 XT, the new queen of 1440p rasterization:
Now it’s time to give you our impressions of this AMD RX 7800 XT, which, let’s not forget, is designed for 1440p definition. One thing’s for sure: we’ve got a lot to say about this new AMD graphics card. Let’s start with its performance in 1440p rasterization, which is quite simply excellent and puts it ahead of NVIDIA’s RTX 4070. You won’t have to compromise on graphics options to play in this definition.
Our two factory-overclocked cards still manage to pick up extra FPS, but above all have a more efficient cooling system.
Ray tracing, NVIDIA still ahead thanks to DLSS:
With ray tracing enabled, our RX 7800 XT still manages to hold its own against the RTX 4070, more often than not achieving an average of 60 FPS. When this isn’t the case, if the game features FSR or XeSS, these upscaling technologies enable a not inconsiderable gain in FPS. Despite this, it’s still the RTX 4070 that fares best with active ray tracing. The arrival of DLSS 3.0 allows NVIDIA to crush the competition in games like Cyberpunk 2077 or Hitman 3. We’d really have liked to see the potential of AMD’s FSR 3.0 land at the same time as this launch, knowing that NVIDIA is already working on version 3.5 of its DLSS.
A very competitive card!
At present, the RTX 3070 Founders Edition is still our reference model for 1440p definition, and was launched at 519 euros in October 2020. Here we are in September 2023, three years later, with an RX 7800 XT priced at 555 euros, with far superior performance. For us, this is a near-perfect price, given that the RTX 4070 Founders Edition is priced at 659 euros and with only 12 GB. The 105-euro difference in price is considerable, given that the card is capable of 1440p with ray tracing active. NVIDIA still has the edge when it comes to ray tracing and, above all, can count on its DLSS, which is proving increasingly efficient. But as far as we’re concerned, NVIDIA will have to review its prices in the days to come, as this RX 7800 XT has a lot to live up to.
All in all, good news, since it’s the future buyer who should be rubbing his hands. Don’t hesitate to wait a few days if you’ve decided to change your graphics card, to see how prices will behave.
NVIDIA’s reaction:
Well, it’s already started, with the price of the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB dropping to 499.99 euros at selected retailers. This price cut will mainly serve to compete with the AMD RX 7700 XT 12 GB model, which is priced at 489 euros for the reference card. There’s no doubt that, knowing NVIDIA, we should be seeing announcements in the coming days in response to the performance of these two new boards, and in particular the RX 7800 XT. First prices are currently arriving on entry-level models for the RTX 4070 at 625 euros.
No overclocking?
No, we haven’t tested overclocking, as current drivers restrict the frequency to 2700 MHz. AMD is aware of the problem and will be proposing a corrective measure with future drivers. We’ll be carrying out a dedicated test using ASUS’ GPU Tweak III software.
The AMD RX 7800 XT reference card:
We liked:
- A card that lets you take full advantage of 1440p without compromising on rasterization
- The sober design of this AMD version
- Classic 8-pin connectors
- Reliable noise levels
- The quality of the board’s design
- Partners’ ability to sell this “reference” board
- Excellent price/performance ratio
- FSR, which, when present, enables a gain in FPS
- 16 GB of memory
We would have liked :
- Better temperature management by the cooling system
- Power consumption has improved, but AMD still needs to do better
- FSR 3 to arrive at the same time as this RX 7800 XT
Right up until the last minute, we hesitated to mention “coup de coeur”, because this AMD RX 7800 XT has everything to please. Performance in 1440p rasterization is excellent, and the card manages to maintain almost 60 FPS when Ray Tracing is activated. Above all, this is the card with the best price/performance ratio in the RX 7000 range. It remains to be seen what the first prices of the partner cards will be, as well as actual availability tomorrow, but this could well be your future graphics card.
Many thanks to AMD for making this sample available.