Regarding the GPU usage % not showing on the 7900 XT- for some reason when I started this round of testing, I could just not get it to display using my usual overlay. I did multiple DDU runs, driver reinstalls, installing older drivers and then upgrading, reinstalling afterburner/rtss, etc. In the end, it wasn't the crucial part of the video, so I just went ahead and ran the benchmarks without a few of the stats showing. I have no idea why it wouldn't work this time, since it usually shows up with no issue. And unfortunately this is the case for all the AMD GPUs I just finished testing in this set of games. The rest of the stats still show on the UE5 games since it was working when I tested that set of games a couple weeks ago.
In these comparisons you keep showing cyberpunk with DLSS Quality and then jumping to performance. Is there a reason you skip Balanced? I'd like to hear your thoughts on that setting compared to the performance setting.
Why unfair comparison? The 7900 series are competing against the 4090 series. 7900 series - 4090 series 7800 series - 4080 series 7700 series - 4070 series 7600 series - 4060 series XT - Ti/Super XTX - Ti Super/Super
I wish we had these prices where I live. Prices in my country converted to usd after taxes and import fees based on the cheapest model I can find: RX 7800 XT -> $610, RTX 4070 -> $685, RTX 4070 S -> $750, RX 7900 XT -> $892, RTX 4070 TI -> $958, RTX 4070 TI S -> $1145 💀
Just to let you all know if you do not know, American taxes (import) are factored into your MSRP since NVIDIA, AMD, and INTEL are all american companies. It depends on your country how much you are taxed. A 7900XT for 750 here in the states is around 850+ in reality.
Just bought the 4070 super and have no regrets as of now. I already talked my way up from a $500 price to $600 and once I saw the price drop on the 7900xt I was having second thoughts but had to remember you have to draw a line on your budget at some point. It’s way too easy to keep talking yourself to a higher and higher GPU and end up spending way more than you originally thought.
VRAM is very important in newer games. The 4070 Super will struggle with only 12GB. Remember also that FSR3 mods allow all DLLS3 FG games to run frame gen on the 7900XT. This makes it very competitive.
@@Dark-qx8rk I agree but at 1440p 12GB of vram is not a problem in the vast majority of games in the vast majority of scenarios and I don’t have a problem running upscalers or slightly lowering settings in the scenarios that it does. Everybody’s situation is different but for my use case spending another $100 from my original budget wasn’t necessary
@@Dark-qx8rkthe mod that replaces DLSS FG with FSR FG requires a nvidia card, you can't use it on a 7900XT. There is another mod that adds FSR FG to games with just FSR SR, but it doesn't work nearly as well because its not hijacking the games inbuilt frame generation like the other mod.
@@Jas7520 Nukem's mod can be used on AMD cards when you install it with DLSS enabler. It's available on Nexus mods. LukeFZ's mod works on all call but you have to pay a patreon fee.
So the question is what is more likely to happen in the future? 7900XT running out of RT capabilities, or 4070 S running out of VRAM, and/or raster performance.
coming as a radeon user, if you buy the 7900XT, you kinda know that there is no future for RT for that card. You would be better off enjoying the raster performance. RT is just to taxing and costly to enjoy in 2023/2024
@@JJssss Agree, 7900xt is dogshit at any form of RT, coming from a 7900xt user. The card cannot even handle Elden Ring RTX beyond medium RT settings at 1440p lol.
as someone who enjoys games in vr, by using mods... 12 gb is already not enough for some games without vr, calculate 4gb vram on top of that, the 7900 xt will be able to use its power 100% of the time for the next 2-4 years, while 4070 already gets all kinds of issues when its vram limited, even leading to unplayable stutters that can cause crashes.
Your channel is honestly one of my go to channels now and its nice to see you gaining so many subs. I think I found this channel when it was pretty much new and you were buying the cards with your own money iirc. Keep up the amazing work man.
*7900XT is pretty underwhelming either way, for a card that's second to the 7900XTX it's pretty sad to see a 4070 S giving it a run for it's money in ANY scenario.*
@@GamerZLogic Only heavy RT, which favors nvidia, and which there are only really a handful of games. The 4070 super also isn't fast at RT either unless you run upscaling + frame gen. Otherwise the 7900 XT is significantly faster in all other scenarios. That's hardly underwhelming.
@@GamerZLogicYou mean 1 year later? Or you mean because developers don't optimize decently for AMD? Think how sad the 4070 was, for the price, one year ago... Then try 4K on a 4070S and come back telling it was a good experience.
@@德仔-r9c it says 700+Tax, so new I guess.... And one of the best times to buy, before April is the week between the years, aka the week between Chrustmas and New Year's Day. Mainly due to returns and unsold stuff, you can expect some decent resl discounts, unlike Black Friday.
Just ordered a 7900XT. I'm honestly a bit worried, as my experience with Radeon/AMD was over a decade ago when the card immediately died on me. Where I live, the 4070 Super I would buy costs 709 €, while the Sapphire Pulse 7900XT costs 749€. I figured that's a good price/value proposition. Roughly a 5% price difference if I math right for lots of raster performance, so I hopefully won't even need FSR most of the time. RT is not important to me. Your videos really helped me out a lot in making this decision. Thank you.
@@Petrikohr@Petrikohr Amazing, it is a machine that rocks everything, and so far, I have no problems. Running it on automatic undervolt atm as I am not too keen on going too deep into overclocking/ undervolting. But that this is an integrated one-button feature is fantastic to me. Love the Adrenaline software, so much better then Nvidias offerings. I must be fair though: On the first install, nothing worked right because Windows was trying to install drivers automatically, which messed up the adrenaline install. I had to use DDU in safe mode to remove everything again and stop Windows from trying to update by itself. After that, it was a breeze.
@@chaosmeisters6781 Oh nice! Yeah the Adrenaline software seems great. Sucks about the first install but glad it was easily fixed. I'll be getting my 7900 XT Saturday. I think I'll just use DDU from the start, just to be safe.
I ordered a 4070 Super to replace my 1060. My CPU is a R5 3600 though😂I do plan to eventually upgrade it to a 5800X3D. I would love to move to AM5 but buying a CPU just makes more sense for me right now. I know it is unbalanced but I had to choose which to upgrade first and the CPU would do NOTHING for me right now.
BTW, I live in South Africa. The 4070 and 7800XT is basically the same price. The 4070 Super I bought was about $50 more than those 2 if you convert into USD. But import tax still makes me sad.
Can't wait to see a revisit to this comparison again in a year or two from now, since it give me the vibes on 3080 vs 6900xt, and 3070 vs 6800xt at launch and revisit 2 years later.
One pro that is never really mentioned for AMD GPUs is that the Adrenalin Software is really good. You can overclock or undervolt each game separate at the touch of a button.
same here, i did notice a bit in dl 2 at distance, but when u play u really wont notice a thing, but if it were more agressive fsr i prob would notice, i tried at 1080p with 6700 xt and it is usable, tho im using 21.5 display so i would notice less than some1 who have 24" or more
The 7900 XT is worth the extra $100 in Cyberpunk, CoD, Starfield, RE4, Robocop, and Immortals of Aveum, but not in Avatar, Alan Wake II, Balder's Gate 3, and Lords of the Fallen. Daniel is right to say that the competitive price for the 7900 XT would be $650. (I personally think $660 would be the tipping point.) At current prices, the 4070 Super is probably a bit of a better buy.
I agree I just got a 4070 super and had buyers remorse but this video made me feel like I made the right choise. Now did I buy the best 4070 SUPER they offer? idek I wish I knew which was the best as far as keeping temps low. I have a MSI x ventus 4070 super its been doing amazing so far. Id say it does 4k gaming fine occasionally micro stutters but its perfect.
While this is true, if more games take the avatar route though or if DLSS is needed, you end up coming out ahead with the lesser card, and saving over $100 on top of electricity. It makes it tough when the 4070 super even has the capacity to beat the 7900xt even if it doesn’t most of the time.
About 7 months ago, I purchased an open box 7900xt Red Devil for $620. Although it was missing the magnetic plastic backplate, it would be a itsbsafe to say I got a good deal!
@Drewtheelder The red devil edition gpu already has a metal backplate, but the limited edition came with a plastic backplate that uses magnets to latch on the metal backplate. More for estics than anything else.
for some reason back then people were selling 7900xt's and xtx's for really low. I've only just seen some at around those prices 6 months later, but still higher. kind of wish i bought one at the time.
XT is faster in raster, but also draws almost 50%+ more power to do it. With DLSS 4070S drops below 200W usage, while even with FSR XT still draws over 300W. This is deal breaker for me.
It is important to note though that Nvidia cards tend to transfer some of their workload to your CPU. Meaning, your CPU will be pushed harder when it is combined with a Nvidia card instead of an AMD card. It definitely won't account for the difference in power draw between GPUs. But it is something to take into account to understand how much a whole build will eventually pull in terms of power. Also, I can't stretch enough that if someone buys a Nvidia card, they will also need a powerful CPU to pair with it. Due to the offloading of some of the workload by the Nvidia cards it can lead to worse performance if your CPU isn't up for the task. When CPU limited, an AMD card of this gen tends to be 20 - 30 percent faster than a CPU limited Nvidia card. Basically due to the fact it relies less on the CPUs performance.
@kenwolf6842 Yes it was marginal but it was $200 cheaper at the time. The 4070ti super has 15% less cuda cores than the 4080 The 7900XT has 14% less stream processors than the 7900XTX. I get this feeling that the 4070ti super is going to be to the 7900XT what the 4080 is to the 7900XTX , According to techpowerup the 4070ti Super is 3% slower than the 7900XT but they exclusively use raster and 4k resolution to rate there cards , Although it does check out on a specs sheet. As in around the same level of raster whilst hammering it in ray tracing. Now in order for that to work for AMD they need to cost less than there respective counterparts , If the 4070Ti super is $800 then amd needs to target the 7900XT at sub $700 which they are almost at. we see from this video that if you take away RT and increase the resolution the 7900XT is between 20-30% ahead of the 4070 Super , So this all checks out to me in the making sense front. I wouldn't be surprised to see the 7900XT at $700 and the 7900XTX at $850 in the near future so to better compete with a 4070ti super at $800 and 4080 super at $1000.
@@Jasontvnd9 Last comparison ive seen of 4080 v XTX was at hardware unboxed and the cards had 0% difference in raster across a couple dozen games. Meanwhile 4080 makes 7900 XTX look like integrated graphics in RT.
@@SoftExo in 2 games with path tracing it does , But the best looking game right now atleast in my opinion is Avatar , The 4080 is faster but its not like it blows it away. Theres no such thing as a bad GPU just a badly priced GPU , If the 7900XTX is priced at $850 and the 4080 super at $1000 it will still be a viable option.
Not just hitting it, going overshoot, in most the tests the RTX 4070 Super was already VRAM capped while the RX 7900 XTX was able to comfortable use 14-16GB of VRAM, which improved texture quality and stability on more intense use sections, which are often missed in benchmarks. Not to mention it also spares you that space from your system RAM/storage. If you are planning to replace your GPU in about 1-3 years, the RTX 4070 Super is a fine buy, but if you want to keep it for longer, then the RX 7900 XTX is a no brainer investment.
@@MsNyara Frankly neither of these are making it much longer if you want max settings performance. Personally I swap cards every year or two. In the end the cost is probably the same but spending 200 every year or two while my card is still worth something makes more sense for me than waiting 5 years with diminishing performance and spending 6 to 800 then.
I'm guessing that price cut is to compete against the 4070 Ti Super at $800 ... The 4070 TI already matched it and beat it for Ray Tracing and the TI Super is going to smoke it The real question will be "Is the 4070 Ti Super worth the extra $90 over a RX 7900 XT?"
The 4070ti Super will easily be worth more than the 90$ over 7900xt. You're getting better raster, better rt, better upscaling, better frame gen, all the while you're not being gimped by the 12gb vram tred nvidia has followed in the 4070ti. I think it'll easily smoke the 7900xt. Either the 7900xt goes below 650 (might be possible as 4070s is 600) or lower OR the 4070ti Super is gonna increase in price. Imagine 800$ being the old 400-500$ as the sweet spot :/ this is what zero competition does to a market. Extremely disappointing 4 years from both nvidia and AMD in every price tier below $1200+
@@mannyman139 Only in a couple of AMD sponsored games, most it was a dead heat and it fell behind with Ray Tracing ..... The TI Super is a different die than the other 4070's, it's moved up to an AD103 plus a 256 bus and I suspect it's being made from excess 4080 chips they didn't sell and won't be good enough for a 4080 Super Source is Techspot but basically it's based on a Hardware Unboxed video of a 50 game test suite ... " After a massive round of benchmarking, we've found that the 7900 XT and 4070 Ti are neck and neck at 1440p on average. Though that shouldn't come as a surprise as the Radeon 7900 XT was just 4% faster on average in our day-one review where we separated the rasterization and ray tracing results."
I never thought I'd say it... I NEVER use upscaling, but Avatar has been looking pretty amazing with 1440p Unobtanium mode on with FSR3 Quality and Frame Gen. It's seriously hard to tell the difference.. it's just a smoother experience. 7900XTX 5800X3D 32GB Ram CL14 for reference.
So the 7900 XT has a modest performance advantage in rasterization, and the extra 8GB of VRAM will undoubtedly give it more long-term viability, but the 4070 Super's proprietary RTX technologies and superior Ray Tracing performance has me feeling that the 7900 XT really has to drop down to at least $650 to remain competitive at all. I'm sure AMD doesn't like that reality but the 4070 Super is simply too strong an option at $600 in the current market. I suspect it'll be a similar story with the 7900 XTX, once the 4070 Ti Super comes out.
"So the 7900 XT has a modest performance advantage in rasterization" You so easily bought the lie...wow! It's a whole lot more than "modest" in actuality. This guy is now practically trying to sell Nvidia cards for them the numbers are so cooked. Why you people don't do your own testing at home to keep these guys honest i'll never know.
@@out42c Bro most people are not out here personally testing gpus and figuring out which is better. Which is why they go to reviewers. That takes time and money most people don't have.
@@out42c what the fuck are you even talking about lmao, the 7900XT is 17% better on average in raster according to TechPowerUP, and it's a tiny-ass lead compared to how much cutting-edge tech you're losing.
@@shortstaccck7965 If they're not testing themselves they should not be making uniformed gross statements then should they? What's more, these creators should be called out for what is a lack of integrity. They sold their souls for money that YOU might be duped.
Been watching you since I bought my 7900 XT back in June, I may have gotten this card instead if it had existed even though I'm an AMD fanboy. That price diff is just to much. 650 is definitely the sweet spot.
You sound like a PC enthusiast that's happy with their purchase and is able to evaluate the market objectively. If you were a fanboy you'd be accusing him of being a paid shill and faking the numbers. It's so bizarre some people and how emotional they become. Thing is as someone that loves PC hardware and all the tech I think Daniel does a pretty good job in his comparisons. He makes a case for either product highlighting the pros and cons. He than shares his thoughts and personal opinion. I don't always agree with the guy but that's ok.
650 is very low price for 20gb card when equivalent are at least 800$. Thats very good price if u can get one and better values than 4070ti with 12gb even than 4070 ti super with 16 gb coz u can use gpu not only for gaming but for work to and raster performance of 7900xt is higher.
@@meltinsr Should the 3060 12GB cost more than the 3070ti 8GB based on your logic? The 7900xt has too weak a chip for 20GB, 16GB is enough for it, like the 6950xt.
@Sayan2233 7900xt is faster than 6950xt in raster and ray tracing. I had 6950xt changed for 7900xtx and have to 4070 so if u calculate and u do the math right 7900xtx is way better work card than every other that has less vram specialy in video editing.
@@meltinsr There is very little difference in performance between the 6950xt and 7900xt. The 7900xt survived because Nvidia had a gap between $600 for the 4070 and $1200 for the 4080. The $800 4070ti was a weak solution. Now 4080c is $1000, 4070ti super is $800, 4070 super (almost similar to 4070ti) is $600. Amd is trapped. The 7900xt should cost $600 for there to be any interest in it. even $710 for 7900xt now is overprice
its really going to be 7900xt vs the 4070ti super that will be the decision point/comparison. Wish AMD would have gone for the jugular here and went straight to $699 on the 7900xt.
@@anthonybaker5199 was thinking 650 originally but then would run into a cannibalisation issue with 7800xt and they would have to push that price down as well. Not that that would be a bad thing but probably unrealistic.
The problem for me is power draw. I don't live in moms basement, and I pay my own electricity. It's not exactly cheap either. There are times when the 7900xt is using over 100 more watts. Once you factor in power the true cost of ownership is more like around $250+ after 4 years. That's assuming rates also don't go up in that time. In this case, it could be a $300+ difference after factoring upfront cost and cost of ownership over time. With more and more titles baking in RT by default Nvidia starts looking better and better from an effeciancy and RT standpoint. If RDNA 4 wants to make a splash AMD needs to fix their gross power consumption and increase RT substantially.
Yeah the only 2 knocks are Watts and RT when it comes to AMD cards .. I undervolted my 6950 XT so it went from 330-373 watts down to 240 and only lost a few frames in the process so I'm happy with them numbers but yes AMD needs to really step up their game when it comes to RT... It's crazy that the 4070 Super a $600 card can outperform my 6950 Xt which was about $1,100 on release day I myself have a 4070 to test out RT and really I guess my eyes are just bad I don't see enough to put RT over 120+ frames so I went back to my 6950 XT and gave my son the 4070.
Yea the Watts are making me squeamish. I really want to Jump to team red as I would rather have raw raster so I do not need to use upscaling in the first place. But the extra cost added by the power draw is not negligible here at 0.30 €. And the card is not worth 1000 € over a few years.
@@НААТ stupid comment of the year. I have a job and I'll bet make more than most people in the comments section. An extra $300 is an extra $300. I plan on retiring early and I try to spend my money wisely. AMD cards due to their terrible effeciancy end up costing more than their Nvidia counterparts due to local utility costs.
@@TV-xv1le an extra 300 is nothing if you have decent job. Stop acting like its the end of the world. Thats still cheaper then having to buy a new 1000€ gpu every year cause the old one can't keep up. Unlike amd
Interestingly, Galax's 4070 Super HOF with 320w and a +211 MHz (2.711 GHz) core clock is still slower than my RX-7900XT XFX Black Edition with a simple undervolt (3GHz). I would rather have the RX-7900XT.
The 4070 Super is not a good 4K card because of vram limitations and generally lower performance, but if playing lower resolutions it can be a good choice.
RDNA3 need to draw 1.5x power and only lead Nvidia by 10% performance need to be talked about more. if it was for CPU comparison then AMD fanboys will sure be all over it.
I have said it before. RDNA 4 needs to drop power draw significantly and increase RT performance. The true cost of AMD gpus is as high and in some cases much higher once you factor in power draw. I suspect the 4070ti super will be a bargain v 7900xt once you factor in power. Something many of these techtubers don't do cause their parents pay the electric bill. Once the ti super comes out the 7900xt needs to drop down to like $600 to be semi attractive.
7900xt stomps the 4070 super. You can undervolt this card to pull 270 and it barely loses performance. I just dont think 12gb vram will cut it. I hope this 4070 super sits and the scalpers get hosed.
@@tadejloncar lol it absolutely stomps on a 4070super in raw performance. You must be on the green juice or cognitive dissonance due to buyers remorse. 7 months ago when I wrote this a 4070 super was 600 and a 7900xt was on promo for like 700. So yes on dollar per frame the 7900xt stomps. And now you can get it for 650 or less it stomps even harder now lol.
@@tadejloncar I would also add that on raw raster, a 7900xt outperforms a 4070ti (non super). You must be heavily ingesting green juice to think that the 4070ti is beating a 7900xt in raster. I mean what benchmarks are you even looking at?
well well , very funny in my poor country difference is 1,08661 just 9% more expensive so i bought rx 7900 xt upgrade from rx 480 very "little" performance bump, i am very very happy, thanks for the video
Nice video, at these prices I consider the 4070S better value, especially taking in superior DLSS image quality, RT and power draw 😮 sticking to 1440p.
Need to disregard the dlss and raytracing ala nvdia scam because it is still useless at any price level for this generation. For power thing it is kinda given since 4070s is 30% slower than 7900xt unless they turn on dlss and ray tracing for power consumption test.
Now consider that 7900XT started as 900$ MSRP that's wild ;) It's a tough call here but i think 7900XT would take the win if you can get it cheaply that is.
I did the math back when the 7900xt came out , to be a worth while cost to performance upgrade over my (at the time) $550 6800xt the 7900xt would need to be in the $700-750 range . Thing is my long term goal is to upgrade to a high refresh rate 4k OLED later this year so I'm more in the market for the xtx. Ultimately it's the monitor that dictates what GPU needed . A nice thing about the 6800xt , i have plenty of time to wait for what i need it has so much life left in it.
You may get a price cut real soon on the 7900 xtx in a couple of weeks. I got the reference model. I wish I had waited for the AIB instead but can't complain at all.
@@anthonybaker5199 yah that would be sweet ! the sapphire nitro is what I want , but realistically I will probably get the pulse , but wouldn't complain over the reference model. Those are the best fit for my computer case .
I am curious to see an overclock the XFX Merc Black Edition and the 4070 super. My XFX Black Edition overclocks to 3 GHz which makes a significant difference in the performance.
12 gb cards will never be able to use 100% of its power. You see if daniel owen actually played modern games with that card in 4k on ultra+raytracing... you would see much different results where the game would have all kinds of issues. I wonder why he doesnt show that, instead of automated benchmark videos...4070 would shit itself in any modern title like RE 4 remake.
@@__-fi6xg it might be fine in some games but might not in others, buit its really meant for 1440p, still i think 12gb is low, and if i remember 7900 xt and xtx are selling as 4k, i really thing they are more suited as 1440p, yes they can game at 4k but at latest unreal 5 they will need to use fsr
They didnt hold back, the silicon performed worse than expected. The 7900xtx was supposed to be 5-10% weeaker than the 4090, similar to the 6900xt vs 3090@@mitrovicc-gr9fb
Hey Daniel! Realy like your Videos! Greatings from Germany! I want to upgrade my 6800 non XT to either the 4070 super or the 7900xt since in some 1440p games like Star wars Jedi Survivor for example I only get around 50FPS with max settings and no Raytraying. Want to always get at least 60FPS in Games. The following thoughts occurred to me. As you pointed out already, I think you should always sell your old GPU to fund your new GPU! Everything else would just be plain stupid unless you have endless amounts of money anyway (which I don't, unfortenetly) , but if you have endless money than why not just buy a 4090 and that's it, right? It recently occured to me that many TH-camrs who make those GPU Benchmark videos often forget to specifcally point that out to their viewship (not you!), which makes so many people forget about that which is a bad mistake, I think, when calculation your FPS per Dollar/Euro gains. So let's jsut say I get around 330 Euros for my 6800 on Ebay. My Calculation is as follows: The cheapest 4070super costs about 600€ currently in Germany so I have to pay another 270€ for about 30 percentish more FPS compared to the RX 6800. The cheapest 7900XT cost 740€. So that would be a 410€ investment for me but I would gain about 60 percent more FPS (which obviously would be double the FPS Gain comparde to the 4070Super). So I have to pay an extra 52 percent (410€/270€) for double the FPS gain compared to the 4070Super (60%FPS gain for the AMD card compared to 30% Nvida Card). (Just for Math illiterate readers of this comment: 270€ would be 100 % 410€ would be 152 %) - but for double the Perfomance increase - so 200% increase. Aditionally (which is just as important): The 7900xt is just worth more than the 4070super. So when I upgrade again in a few years I will get more money out of my 7900xt when selling it then to fund my upgrade in let's say three to four years. (That is an important factor, since we talk about a reasonable timeframe of maybe three to four years and not 20years or so) Let's just say, instead of the 140€ Price difference now, I am getting half of it, which is 70€, more for the 7900xt when selling it compared to the 4070super in a few years. So I have to cut that down from my 410€ pricing as well (not factoring in inflation and many other potentially unforseable variables that might occur in the next few years). So 410€ - 70€ would be 340€ in the long run for the AMD Card compared to 270€ for the Nvidia Card. So I would have to pay an extra 26% (340€/270€) (in the long run!) for the AMD card for double the FPS gain. So since I think I might just stretch my budget that extra 140€ for the 7900xt I think I will get the 7900xt. An addition factors might be that the 20GB advantage for the AMD 7900xt might be worth even more moneywise (relatively!) when selling it in three to four years to finance my upgrade then, than it is now compared to the 4070 super. SInce games uses more VRAM over time (as you so often points out) and gamers in the futre will want a have futureproof VRAM capacity in three years or four years time just as gamers want to be futureproof now. So maybe I will still even get 100€ (instead of 70€) more for my 7900xt in three years time compared to the 4070super when selling it. And: FSR will be way more advanced then, than it is now. And with FSR 3 and especially FS3.1 there is a trend apparent that FSR lowers the gap to DLSS with every new update. And this trend is likely going to continue since, as I read, PS6 and next XBox, what ever it will be called then, will also feature AMD Hadware and they already try to implement FSR3 in Console gaming in current the generation of consoles. And Playstion as well as Microsoft will have a yery high incentive in telling AMD to get their FSR (as well as their Frame Generation) fixed! (fixed is such a strong word but I really think as Upscaling and Frame Generation are such new inventions and as past has shown again and again that if one company has a way better product in tech as a technology is still in it's infancy it usually doesn't take to much time for competitors to be able to close the gap to some extend (in this case DLSS vs FSR). But all of that still is mere speculation of coure (especially since Nvidia has a monopoly in AI and who knows which miracles they will work with that in the near future... But on the other hand if they completly new invent computer graphics with AI they will find a way to make you pay for it as already seen in the fact that Nvidia's frame Generation, which is, correct me if I'm wrong, only limeted to the 4000series GPUS and the 5000series will most likely be released in the not so far future). Ok. Whereas the math I presented is very sound, I think, everthing else remains in the realm of pure speculation. Wow, writing that comment really made me see things much clearer. My intention when starting to write this comment was actually to ask you given the decision I have to make, because I really really don't want to invest three quarter of a thousand Euros for just a GPU especially since, unfortunately, I haven't won the lottery in recent times and 600€ was actually my absolut limit. But considering the Math and my desire to have a good gaming experience I think I will go for the 7900xt. Ah, I forgot one more important thing which isn't mentioned anywhere on youtube as well. I, as most gamers probably, don't have a 4k Monitor as 4k Monitors with high refresh rates are still quit expensive. (Don't know any statistics about that, though...) I only have a 1440p Monitor. But AMD offers (Nvidia probably does as well, don't know about that) "Virtual Super Resolution". And the Image actually looks way better in many games when rendering a game in 4k native or in older titles even in 8k. I tried Raytracing in some currenct games with my 6800 (which cripples my Framerate of course) but I wasn't that impressed with the visual improvements. Whereas running a game in 4K native massively improved visual Quality for me in many games. No one mentions that. Maybe many youtubers, think in the back of their mind, ok, the 4070super is super for 1440p now whereas the 7900xt is kind of an overkill for 1440p as things stand today and will be a bit weak for 4k in the near future since it's more of an entrylevel card for 4k Gaming in most games... I don't know but for anyone using AMD (who has read my comment up to this point) try Super Resolution more often! It beats Raytracing in my opion. Daniel, If you (or anyone) read my comment till the end: Can you make a video about the two main points of this comment regarding the math? (1) facturing in what you get for your old GPU first and only then doing the math. That of corse always depends on the persons current GPU which makes making videos in that mannor more demanding. (2) the more expensive GPU will still be worth more money if you sell it in a few years. (Maybe TH-camrs think like: Ok, If I buy a house that will be my asset forever whereas a GPU is tech and tech loses it's value so fast that it will have zero value in a few years so NEVER tell people to "invest" in tech... I don't know) Noone evertalks about these factors on TH-cam when deciding what GPU to buy in making the optimal choise... Love your Videos! Keep it up!
damn the 7900 used about 50% more power for about the same perf. the 4070 super would be great if limited to 150W, but I wouldn't pay 700€ for it, I think it should be priced at around 500€
i still wouldnt buy cuz it have 12gb, what people makes to buy nvidia gpus are software options it have, dlss, rt, fg, but with 12gb it will run out fast, but could alway decrease texture quality but who would do that for 700 euro product, also lets be fair, if person can buy gpu that cost 700 or more, who cares about how much power it consumes, 4070 ti super at other hand is better option, it will have 16gb and will be strong
This seals the deal. Architecturally the 4070 Super is miles and miles ahead of the 7900XT. 220 Watt is extremely good, I will pick one up. Yeah, it's very expensive, even more so in Europe, but the card is good. Very good. No shade on people having different opinions.
Even though this isnt the most fair comparison its crazy to see the 4070 super can beat the 7900 xt by a lot in ray tracing. The 4070 super is actually the better deal here which is crazy to think
i wish nvidia had a same vram : bandwidth cards just like 7900xt, 7800xt.. within similar price they are charging toooo much for such 12gb:192bit only hope is the battlemage, their a770 did really well despite their driver issues+ tdp but they have worked really hard and still working on improvement. and giving 16gb vram :256bit bus + good rt performance on that price point is just insane and none amd or nvidia have ever made such a card like that
Yep. The RTX 4070S is a $600 GPU with 12gb/192bit VRAM… the same as the RTX 3060, their last gen card that costs half as much. It should be 16Gb/256bit minimum. I’m also looking forward to seeing what Intel offer with Battlemage. I have an RX6800 and was considering upgrading to a 4070S or 7900 XT, but I think I’m going to hold out for the next gen.
Thanks for another very interesting comparison with the respective price points in mind. :) As a small note, as someone that goes back and forth between my consoles and PC a lot, I tend to keep increasing the resolution and settings as long as I can still maintain 1% lows above 30 fps in most genres. So the 4K Ultra settings are usually the most relevant for me.
So the mantra is: Whatever NVIDIA does, buy AMD because they have better "price to performance". Even when AMD cards consume a lot more power per fps, have worse ray tracing performance, poorer driver stability and smaller market than NVIDIA (hence less support from games). Also why do you compare a 600$ (RTX 4070S) card with 900$ card (RX 7900XT)? it's so unfair and sad.
I would get the 7900xt for that price. I went all out and got 7900XTX for 999 in feb. 2023. Never regreted it. Amd Uses more of the vram for sure. I had up to 21-23 gb usage at times with 7900xtx.
The thing that most people ignore or just don't notice is that while AMD GPUs appear to use more VRAM compared to NVIDIA ones, in an apples to apples comparison NVIDIA cards use more system ram instead. This is very evident and noticeable in a video Daniel did not too long ago comparing NVIDIA and AMD VRAM usages which people also commented about.
Daniel I love your channel! Always fun to see how these gpus compare especially when I’m considering upgrading from my 6700xt to a 4070. I’m not sure if I should get the super yet considering I can find 4070s for under 500, but it’s something I’m working through. Keep up the good work!
For longevity the 7900 XT is worth it for sure, especially if it drops bellow $700, but even at $710 it looks ok, however I would wait for the 4070 TI Super because if you have $600 or $710 for a GPU, you most likely also have $800.
Damn you can tell AMD is paying for how late they jumped on the RT train, it's been two gens they seem to catch up on nvidia in terms of perf/price until we bring RT perfs. They really need to bet on that and AI for the next generation or else they'll always look like the alternative brand to go for when nvidia is too expensive instead of looking like an actual competitor.
Naw, AMD's approach was probably the correct one(for their product line) AMD is using less dedicated RT hardware and just adding a ray accelrator per CU which isn't the best for performance, but probably saves a lot of design cost with many different products like console chips, low power APUs and high performance GPUs I think amd is trying to avoid previous manufacturing price mistakes made with the Vega GPUs(that HBM was so expensive) so they are taking a smaller, more conservative approach
As much as I am an AMD fan for CPU's, I honestly cant justify their prices for GPUs. I dont use ray tracing, but the cuda, tensor cores, etc makes the nvidia a MUCH better value. AI will be coming to local PC's built into apps and Windows soon and if AMD doesnt up its game fast they wont be even on my radar. 4070S vs 7900xt even at same price i would pick the 4070.
Windows features will run more than fine in 7900 XT. Also AI uses memory and 20GB is a lot more than 12GB. Also don't confuse 4090 AI power to 4070 class of GPUs.
Cuda is slowly being phased out of AI and soon the production workflows. As it turns out, most large companies don't like to be a the whims of another company's black box tech.
"Slashes prices" Seems to be an NA thing. Here in Sweden despite the "slashing" the 7900XT is still €120 - 200 more than a 4070 Super (which is also the same price as a regular 4070)
in Europe the 4070 super starting price is 670 euro for a 2 fan shit looking model. if you want something like 3 fan or cooler looking then it is going to cost 750+ euro. ATM you can find the 7900xt for 740-750 euro since the lowering of the prices. At this point i will wait for prime day or some shit and get a 7900xt and f ngreedia
4070 super is handicapped by 12Gigs of VRAM, which is a bummer to future proof.. at least it could've got 16GB VRAM. Same 16GB for 4070 Ti Super and 20GB for 4080 Super. This would be perfect and would kill AMD out of the competition
But you cannot leave out that the 709.99 7900xt cards are 3 fan AIB with bigger coolers and more performance. The 599.99 4070 super is only for 2 fan cards which will not cool or overclock as well and also will effect life span of the cards. You should compare 3 fan AIB to 3 fan AIB for accurate price comparison. It would be 649.99 vs 709.99 for much more vram and performance. Get the 7900xt unless you only like Nvidia then get that but if you do don't deny you bought it for only that reason because the 7900xt is a much better value for money with those cards. Oh and I prefer nvidia have a rtx 4080 rog strix I bought it because it looks incredible and does great at 1440p but was not a better value vs the 7900xtx. Also why do you guys only test using the small % of games that use or have optional RT? It is really deceiving to 90% of gamer who don't use or care for RT it really does not add any value it actually hurst game play much more than it helps. You should be showing a majority of non RT games not the opposite sorry but that is very shady and Deceptive. the 7900xt is much fast, period, when you factor in that out of all games only a small minority have RT and the rest do not. For this reason I find most benchmarks and comparisons invalid.
He benchmarks new games, not 2yr+ old games. Lots of new AAA titles have RT or Lumen. Also, you can buy the cheapest 4070 Super and just flash a 350w+ vbios onto it for FREE. This gives it increased OC headroom for zero money. For 7900xt you have to pay more for access to higher power limits. Overall, I still think buying anything other than a 4090 this generation will be obsolete for newer titles in 2-3yrs. Even the 4090 will only be a 1440p with upscaling gpu soon.
$650 4070super gigabyte gaming approx. Sapphire Impulse 7900xt for $710. It’s more correct to compare with the 4070 super msi ventus 3x - $630. The result is that the 7900xt is 12% higher, it has no technology and is slightly faster in raster. This worked before when the 7800xt cost $100 less than the 4070. It doesn't work when the 7900xt costs $100 more than the 4070super.
@@iamspencerx not when DLSS looks better than many games TAA implementations. At this point "native res" is a meaningless term in any game with TAA, as long as it looks sharp who cares. Though yes, with AMD you have no choice but to run native res so i guess it's more important there. For NVIDIA DLSS offers more FPS, access to frame gen and ray reconstruction all while looking better than TAA.
In 2024, we shouldn't need upscaling at 1080p or 1440p, especially not on 27-inch monitors. Just like Frame Generation is simply garbage. Games should simply be optimized and graphics card manufacturers should promote raw performance and not "extenders"
@@Salciiiiii No. 4080 competes with 7900XTX. They are also closer pricewise than 7900XT to 4080/Super. AMD sadly has nothing to compete with 4090, as we all know. Not that it matters much given the crazy price of 4090.
COD people will want the 7900 XT, IMO. It's interesting that the 4070 Super consistently reads higher temps, while drawing 100+ watts less power. Is that just a difference in how temp is read on the GPUs? I tend to think the 4070 Ti would be a more direct comparison to the 7900 XT. Perhaps not.
Man thanks for this vid! I was pulling my hair out thinking my 7900xt was under performing. Avatar is demanding. With some tweaks I am getting better performance. Thanks.
7900xt is clearly the better 1440p and 4k card considering it has 20gb on board. If the 4070S had 16gb, id agree with your final assessment. But for now, 7900xt is the go to as long as its price is under $720 and 4070S stays above $600, which most seem to be around the $640 range.
The percentage in performance gain over the 4070 isn’t great enough justify 100 more dollars and worse upscaling. Both the 4070 and 7900XT are expensive 1440p cards that struggle in 4K, unless you’re dropping settings.
4070 ti super will not cost that much more than the 7900 xt, and has better features to boot. This price drop is not good enough imo. Theres not enough of a performance difference here to justify paying over a 100 more for 7900xt instead of 4070 super. Especially if you bring in RT+DLSS in to the equation. 12gb vram is enough for the next few years, there is no need for 20gb vram. Games are developed with consoles in mind. A few unoptimised titles does not mean we need 16-20gb cards.
@@chy.0190 That is patently false as you can already see the 12GB getting capped out in games out already today. If my card needs to last 4 years I would not buy 12GB cards atm.
I exclusively play in 4k, at least upscaled. Dont care about ray tracing and probably wont for at least a few more years. Bought the 7900xt as soon as I saw price drop. Additionally, I'm coping and hoping that FSR will improve to meet DLSS. There's lots of room for improvement as outside of RT, this is the biggest argument people make to buy Nvidia over AMD. But as is, I think FSR is fine. Prefer those higher framerates in 4k non RT
Well if it's 5% - 10% slower than a 4080, it will be around %10 - %15 slower than an XTX which in turn is around %20 faster than an XT. So that means the 4070 ti Super will probably be between %5 - %10 faster in raster performance than an XT. That's good performance, but I wouldn't call it demolish. Everything depends on the price anyway tbh. Recently I bought a 7900 XTX, because I found one for €250 less than they usually cost where I live. So €1.000 for the card. Compare that to the cheapest RTX 4080 which costs €1.419 and the choice is pretty quickly made. Paying a 40+ % premium for a card that's 5% slower in rasterization would be kind of daft, imo. Especially if that 4080 model is an Eagle or Ventus cards, which have notoriously weak coolers. A card with the same Asus cooler as the one I bought would be €1.499 (so basically a 50% premium). Anyway, if the 4070 ti Super comes out at its MSRP of $800, it will most likely be around €975 - €1.000 for the cheapest models here (probably around 1.050 - 1.100 for the models with a better cooler), which brings it in the territory of the XTX. The XT saw a little price drop of around €20 when I checked it yesterday, which means it costs €780 right now. But yeah again... different regions, different prices, different situations of whether a card has the better value or not. In another country it might be a completely different story.
60% more power consumption for 10% more performance is really not worth it in my opinion. AMD needs to price 7900 series a lot more aggressively, like $600 for 7900XT, and $750 for 7900XTX.
In my country 4070s cost about 800$, around 1000 for 4070ti and 1200 for rx7900xtx/ rtx 4070ti S The price probably won't go down because they need to push all the old rtx model 😭
DLSS looks better. But does it really matter? Because most people uses 27" and smaller monitor. At that size, most games will look similar with both upscaling at quality.
i cant say for 27 1440p but at 21,5 at 1080p if its well implemented u will notice but it will be minor, at distance that most of time u wont pay attention, in ets 2 i play its flickering at native and quality of picture in other games that have fsr still looks better than that, cant say its like that in all cases cuz i didnt test every fsr game
Try playing Darktide with FSR on on a 23'' 1080p monitor. It's like you're going blind and need glasses, not to mention all the shimmering at oblique angles. FSR is that bad in detail-heavy games and people downplay it in these comment sections.
@@krixtorei if you are using a 7800xt or higher.....why would you even want to user FSR at 1080p though and it's like that for MANY games. If FSR is required but doesn't look good in a particular game just drop settings a bit it's that simple.
@@pdmerritt I was answering a very specific statement about the tech itself. The fact of the matter is, regarding the original post, FSR is undeniably worse both in visual quality and in the eye strain effect upscaling causes compared to DLSS under pretty much every circumstance even in sub 27'' monitors despite what was claimed in the OP. No, they would not look anywhere near the same like he claims. No one's talking about performance here.
@@krixtorei You totally missed the context of what i'm saying here. Scaling isn't mandatory....if you own a AMD product and the scaling looks particularly bad. You can usually turn down the settings a bit where you no longer need to scale the image to have a playable frame rate. Also, the way you talk is FSR is so bad that it can kill your gameplay....I have a 7800xt GPU and my best friend has a 4080. Yes I can see the difference between the two but to say it always looks terrible is far from the truth. Also, it varies depending upon game. Robocop for example is one game where it does look bad and I simply would never turn it on in that game. Doesn't really need it though as it has quite playable frame rates at native.
What really doesnt make sense is when you're spending sooo much on a GPU that you are stressing over pretty much a small price. Frame generation seems to drop kick AMD in the genitals. All that AMD Vram seems to do NOTHING for the AMD GPU's. In the future when that vram is more useful you likely won't have the power to be playing at 1440p+ and 80fps+. I think everyone will go with a 4070 TI Super. You get that 16gigs vram for the future even. Lower energy consumption (assuming, seems clear for Nvidia). Frame generation vs unknow future vram consumption. Likely will be priced as fair as we can get it. The 4080 Super will cost less, but going from 2 kidneys to 1 is not a good deal.
I agree with some people saying that this 4070 Super is a bit late to the party but tbh it's the only card that has the "right price" at $600 right now. The others have prices that only would have made sense one year ago. 7800XT should be $400-$450, 4070(normal) $500, 7900XT $650, and 7900XTX $850. The 4070ti Super seems fine at 800$ if performance is what we expect but the 4080 super should be dropped even further to $950 because you don't get any extra VRAM.
Daniel, I really like your videos. But I don't understand why people compare the 4070 Super to the 7900XT. This is a card against the 7800XT. It is 10% faster in raster and 40% faster in RT while eating 15% less while being 20% more expensive. so it is absolutely on par with the 7800XT in terms of price/value. It is clear that the 7900XT will compete with the 4070 Ti super.
Imo, I think AMD needs to drop the 7900XT needs to be at sub $650 price point as image quality with upscaling and fps are not looking favourable against Nvidia’s option and features. Yes AMD come along way from Radeons software beginning with FSR 1.0 …… but they’ve a lot more to do to be called a true competitor to Nvidia. I’m saying this as mainly an Nvidia user, but also an AMD Radeon user!
@@walkemdown4127and even if you need upscaling, fsr doesn't look as bad as people say (at least on higher resolutions) and xess looks pretty much as good as dlss now.
Dumbass deniers of the superior image quality, technologies and power efficiency of nvidia, only because they choose raderon, they stupidly have to flood the internet with their lies of superiority where’s obviously none. RT is very present in games and yeah ots here to stay, dlss quality improves the image against native in many cases.
Regarding the GPU usage % not showing on the 7900 XT- for some reason when I started this round of testing, I could just not get it to display using my usual overlay. I did multiple DDU runs, driver reinstalls, installing older drivers and then upgrading, reinstalling afterburner/rtss, etc. In the end, it wasn't the crucial part of the video, so I just went ahead and ran the benchmarks without a few of the stats showing. I have no idea why it wouldn't work this time, since it usually shows up with no issue. And unfortunately this is the case for all the AMD GPUs I just finished testing in this set of games. The rest of the stats still show on the UE5 games since it was working when I tested that set of games a couple weeks ago.
In these comparisons you keep showing cyberpunk with DLSS Quality and then jumping to performance. Is there a reason you skip Balanced? I'd like to hear your thoughts on that setting compared to the performance setting.
Thats why people go with nvidia, it just works.
Why unfair comparison? The 7900 series are competing against the 4090 series.
7900 series - 4090 series
7800 series - 4080 series
7700 series - 4070 series
7600 series - 4060 series
XT - Ti/Super
XTX - Ti Super/Super
@@AlfaPro1337
No one cares about names, just price to performance
Australia (USD price conversion from AUD) 4070 Super & 7900 XT are the same price at $USD790
I wish we had these prices where I live. Prices in my country converted to usd after taxes and import fees based on the cheapest model I can find: RX 7800 XT -> $610, RTX 4070 -> $685, RTX 4070 S -> $750, RX 7900 XT -> $892, RTX 4070 TI -> $958, RTX 4070 TI S -> $1145 💀
Dude what the 4070 ti is 1145 that’s fucking insane
@@LousyZLuke yep. That's what Amazon is asking for on their only RTX 4070 TI Super model for sale
buy 4060 or 7600, embrace 720p gaming, 720p for life 😘
This is much cheaper compared to my country, 4070 costs usd 781.
Just to let you all know if you do not know, American taxes (import) are factored into your MSRP since NVIDIA, AMD, and INTEL are all american companies. It depends on your country how much you are taxed. A 7900XT for 750 here in the states is around 850+ in reality.
Just bought the 4070 super and have no regrets as of now. I already talked my way up from a $500 price to $600 and once I saw the price drop on the 7900xt I was having second thoughts but had to remember you have to draw a line on your budget at some point. It’s way too easy to keep talking yourself to a higher and higher GPU and end up spending way more than you originally thought.
VRAM is very important in newer games. The 4070 Super will struggle with only 12GB. Remember also that FSR3 mods allow all DLLS3 FG games to run frame gen on the 7900XT. This makes it very competitive.
imagine being so tarded that you spend over $600 on a gpu with 12gb of ram. Huang really does have loyal, braindead sycophants as coomsumers.
@@Dark-qx8rk I agree but at 1440p 12GB of vram is not a problem in the vast majority of games in the vast majority of scenarios and I don’t have a problem running upscalers or slightly lowering settings in the scenarios that it does. Everybody’s situation is different but for my use case spending another $100 from my original budget wasn’t necessary
@@Dark-qx8rkthe mod that replaces DLSS FG with FSR FG requires a nvidia card, you can't use it on a 7900XT. There is another mod that adds FSR FG to games with just FSR SR, but it doesn't work nearly as well because its not hijacking the games inbuilt frame generation like the other mod.
@@Jas7520 Nukem's mod can be used on AMD cards when you install it with DLSS enabler. It's available on Nexus mods. LukeFZ's mod works on all call but you have to pay a patreon fee.
So the question is what is more likely to happen in the future? 7900XT running out of RT capabilities, or 4070 S running out of VRAM, and/or raster performance.
coming as a radeon user, if you buy the 7900XT, you kinda know that there is no future for RT for that card. You would be better off enjoying the raster performance. RT is just to taxing and costly to enjoy in 2023/2024
Both
You'll never get any RT out of a 12gb gpu. Only low iq morons buy a $600+ gpu with 12gb of ram.
@@JJssss Agree, 7900xt is dogshit at any form of RT, coming from a 7900xt user. The card cannot even handle Elden Ring RTX beyond medium RT settings at 1440p lol.
as someone who enjoys games in vr, by using mods... 12 gb is already not enough for some games without vr, calculate 4gb vram on top of that, the 7900 xt will be able to use its power 100% of the time for the next 2-4 years, while 4070 already gets all kinds of issues when its vram limited, even leading to unplayable stutters that can cause crashes.
7900xt stomps in VRAM and price to raster performance.
I say as a 3080 owner
The Ray Tracing performance isn’t that horrible either. As long as you’re not going full Path Tracing.
Also stomp in driver issues too from the look of it
@@krizby87and what are the exact issues?
@@krizby87 at least the drivers are open source :)
can't wait to switch to 8900xtx from my 3080 10G
hopefully amd delivers
Your channel is honestly one of my go to channels now and its nice to see you gaining so many subs. I think I found this channel when it was pretty much new and you were buying the cards with your own money iirc. Keep up the amazing work man.
Some of the reason why the 7900XT pulls more ahead at 4k is also the memory bandwidth is larger, in addition to the 20GB vs 12GB.
*7900XT is pretty underwhelming either way, for a card that's second to the 7900XTX it's pretty sad to see a 4070 S giving it a run for it's money in ANY scenario.*
@@GamerZLogic Only heavy RT, which favors nvidia, and which there are only really a handful of games. The 4070 super also isn't fast at RT either unless you run upscaling + frame gen. Otherwise the 7900 XT is significantly faster in all other scenarios. That's hardly underwhelming.
@@GamerZLogicYou mean 1 year later?
Or you mean because developers don't optimize decently for AMD? Think how sad the 4070 was, for the price, one year ago...
Then try 4K on a 4070S and come back telling it was a good experience.
@@GamerZLogicnot a very logical comment for a guy with Logic in his name
@@GamerZLogic attention seeker
Got my 7900xt during Christmas for $700 plus tax and it was definitely worth it. It’s a killer 1440p card for high refresh rates.
$700 used or new ?
@@德仔-r9c it says 700+Tax, so new I guess....
And one of the best times to buy, before April is the week between the years, aka the week between Chrustmas and New Year's Day.
Mainly due to returns and unsold stuff, you can expect some decent resl discounts, unlike Black Friday.
@@德仔-r9c i don't know
@@德仔-r9c why didn't you choose the 4070?
@@slimshady91bat7900xt > 4070
Just ordered a 7900XT. I'm honestly a bit worried, as my experience with Radeon/AMD was over a decade ago when the card immediately died on me. Where I live, the 4070 Super I would buy costs 709 €, while the Sapphire Pulse 7900XT costs 749€. I figured that's a good price/value proposition. Roughly a 5% price difference if I math right for lots of raster performance, so I hopefully won't even need FSR most of the time. RT is not important to me. Your videos really helped me out a lot in making this decision. Thank you.
Just checking because you said you were worried, how has your 7900XT been?
@@Petrikohr@Petrikohr Amazing, it is a machine that rocks everything, and so far, I have no problems. Running it on automatic undervolt atm as I am not too keen on going too deep into overclocking/ undervolting. But that this is an integrated one-button feature is fantastic to me. Love the Adrenaline software, so much better then Nvidias offerings. I must be fair though: On the first install, nothing worked right because Windows was trying to install drivers automatically, which messed up the adrenaline install. I had to use DDU in safe mode to remove everything again and stop Windows from trying to update by itself. After that, it was a breeze.
@@chaosmeisters6781 Oh nice! Yeah the Adrenaline software seems great. Sucks about the first install but glad it was easily fixed. I'll be getting my 7900 XT Saturday. I think I'll just use DDU from the start, just to be safe.
@@chaosmeisters6781hi, how does this card perform in editing, streaming and rendering?
@@Petrikohr @chaosmeisters6781 hey guys. its been 7 months. How is your experience so far? trying to get one too
If the 7900XT gets to sub $700, it’s going to be an unbelievable value.
it literally showed couple models at 709.99. does 9.99 make that much of a difference??
I should’ve been more specific - I meant closer to $650 USD.
@@ipressdatofu now that sounds bit too good to be the case for brand new card.
@@ipressdatofu if they put it that low they might as well just discontinue the 7800xtx
Good value? yes, but unbelievable? Hell no, for that it has to be like below 600$.
I ordered a 4070 Super to replace my 1060. My CPU is a R5 3600 though😂I do plan to eventually upgrade it to a 5800X3D. I would love to move to AM5 but buying a CPU just makes more sense for me right now.
I know it is unbalanced but I had to choose which to upgrade first and the CPU would do NOTHING for me right now.
BTW, I live in South Africa. The 4070 and 7800XT is basically the same price. The 4070 Super I bought was about $50 more than those 2 if you convert into USD. But import tax still makes me sad.
you'll want to upgrade the 3600 eventually. It was like getting a new PC alleviating the CPU bottleneck with my 3080 going up to a 5900x.
@@zhon5311 That's a damn good upgrade! I kinda regret getting the 5800X3D over the 5900x.
@@TheLongWindyou shouldn’t, 5800x3d is way better in terms of gaming.
I did the same upgrade last Summer, no regrets! (actually 3700X to 5800X3D, using a 3090 the new CPU really helped with the 1% lows)
Fantastic work as usual. Hope to see an XTX comparison with the 4070S and 4080S in the future
Can't wait to see a revisit to this comparison again in a year or two from now, since it give me the vibes on 3080 vs 6900xt, and 3070 vs 6800xt at launch and revisit 2 years later.
One pro that is never really mentioned for AMD GPUs is that the Adrenalin Software is really good. You can overclock or undervolt each game separate at the touch of a button.
@BlackFlag714 What's that got to do with my comment? Also what's so funny?
Let's be real I have been gaming for over 38 years and a little bit of distant flicker has never bugged me yet.
That fuzzy pong ball
same here, i did notice a bit in dl 2 at distance, but when u play u really wont notice a thing, but if it were more agressive fsr i prob would notice, i tried at 1080p with 6700 xt and it is usable, tho im using 21.5 display so i would notice less than some1 who have 24" or more
I see a Daniel Owen video, I click
The 7900 XT is worth the extra $100 in Cyberpunk, CoD, Starfield, RE4, Robocop, and Immortals of Aveum, but not in Avatar, Alan Wake II, Balder's Gate 3, and Lords of the Fallen. Daniel is right to say that the competitive price for the 7900 XT would be $650. (I personally think $660 would be the tipping point.) At current prices, the 4070 Super is probably a bit of a better buy.
I agree I just got a 4070 super and had buyers remorse but this video made me feel like I made the right choise. Now did I buy the best 4070 SUPER they offer? idek I wish I knew which was the best as far as keeping temps low. I have a MSI x ventus 4070 super its been doing amazing so far. Id say it does 4k gaming fine occasionally micro stutters but its perfect.
Super is still tier under 7900xt, maybe even two in 4k.. I chose 4k over RT with upscaling every day and 710$ is solid price for xt..
While this is true, if more games take the avatar route though or if DLSS is needed, you end up coming out ahead with the lesser card, and saving over $100 on top of electricity. It makes it tough when the 4070 super even has the capacity to beat the 7900xt even if it doesn’t most of the time.
4070 ti super gonna destroy 7900xt in RT and dlss images quantity
Fair enough, its interesting seeing what other people use. Personally I think RT is more visually impressive than the jump from 1440 to 4k.
About 7 months ago, I purchased an open box 7900xt Red Devil for $620. Although it was missing the magnetic plastic backplate, it would be a itsbsafe to say I got a good deal!
Does magnetic plastic exist?
@Drewtheelder The red devil edition gpu already has a metal backplate, but the limited edition came with a plastic backplate that uses magnets to latch on the metal backplate. More for estics than anything else.
for some reason back then people were selling 7900xt's and xtx's for really low. I've only just seen some at around those prices 6 months later, but still higher. kind of wish i bought one at the time.
Grabbed a 7900XT for $630 back last summer. Absolutely crushed the 3070 I previously had in every way. The 8 GB of VRAM was awful at 1440p.
Same thing for me. Upgraded to a 7900XT from a 3070.
Yeah that was when nobody was buying GPUs at all really
How the fuck did you find a 7900 XT for $630 last summer?
I never had any issues on my 3070 laptop at 1600p. Just turn textures down a notch.
@Jtwizzle You are based
XT is faster in raster, but also draws almost 50%+ more power to do it. With DLSS 4070S drops below 200W usage, while even with FSR XT still draws over 300W. This is deal breaker for me.
It is important to note though that Nvidia cards tend to transfer some of their workload to your CPU. Meaning, your CPU will be pushed harder when it is combined with a Nvidia card instead of an AMD card. It definitely won't account for the difference in power draw between GPUs. But it is something to take into account to understand how much a whole build will eventually pull in terms of power.
Also, I can't stretch enough that if someone buys a Nvidia card, they will also need a powerful CPU to pair with it. Due to the offloading of some of the workload by the Nvidia cards it can lead to worse performance if your CPU isn't up for the task. When CPU limited, an AMD card of this gen tends to be 20 - 30 percent faster than a CPU limited Nvidia card. Basically due to the fact it relies less on the CPUs performance.
@@tominatorxx lol
4070 TI super vs 7900XTX cant wait to see that
Itll be the same as the 4080 , 7900XTX faster in raster and slower in RT.
@@Jasontvnd9 it was barely beating it in ras
@kenwolf6842 Yes it was marginal but it was $200 cheaper at the time.
The 4070ti super has 15% less cuda cores than the 4080
The 7900XT has 14% less stream processors than the 7900XTX.
I get this feeling that the 4070ti super is going to be to the 7900XT what the 4080 is to the 7900XTX , According to techpowerup the 4070ti Super is 3% slower than the 7900XT but they exclusively use raster and 4k resolution to rate there cards , Although it does check out on a specs sheet.
As in around the same level of raster whilst hammering it in ray tracing.
Now in order for that to work for AMD they need to cost less than there respective counterparts , If the 4070Ti super is $800 then amd needs to target the 7900XT at sub $700 which they are almost at.
we see from this video that if you take away RT and increase the resolution the 7900XT is between 20-30% ahead of the 4070 Super , So this all checks out to me in the making sense front.
I wouldn't be surprised to see the 7900XT at $700 and the 7900XTX at $850 in the near future so to better compete with a 4070ti super at $800 and 4080 super at $1000.
@@Jasontvnd9 Last comparison ive seen of 4080 v XTX was at hardware unboxed and the cards had 0% difference in raster across a couple dozen games. Meanwhile 4080 makes 7900 XTX look like integrated graphics in RT.
@@SoftExo in 2 games with path tracing it does , But the best looking game right now atleast in my opinion is Avatar , The 4080 is faster but its not like it blows it away.
Theres no such thing as a bad GPU just a badly priced GPU , If the 7900XTX is priced at $850 and the 4080 super at $1000 it will still be a viable option.
You can turn on GPU usage on the monitoring on the AMD 7900xtx to better compare usage on the 4070 vs 7900xtx with ray tracing on.
A brand new card already hitting vram limit in Avatar with 1440p ultra.. yikes
Not just hitting it, going overshoot, in most the tests the RTX 4070 Super was already VRAM capped while the RX 7900 XTX was able to comfortable use 14-16GB of VRAM, which improved texture quality and stability on more intense use sections, which are often missed in benchmarks. Not to mention it also spares you that space from your system RAM/storage.
If you are planning to replace your GPU in about 1-3 years, the RTX 4070 Super is a fine buy, but if you want to keep it for longer, then the RX 7900 XTX is a no brainer investment.
@@MsNyara Frankly neither of these are making it much longer if you want max settings performance. Personally I swap cards every year or two. In the end the cost is probably the same but spending 200 every year or two while my card is still worth something makes more sense for me than waiting 5 years with diminishing performance and spending 6 to 800 then.
@@SpartanArmy117 Well, then the RTX 4070 Super is your product, that is the good thing about free market, each one buys what it suits them.
I wish I could afford a 7900xt, in Canada its 1100 for the cheapest one and then there is a 15 percent sales tax.
I know right
I'm guessing that price cut is to compete against the 4070 Ti Super at $800 ... The 4070 TI already matched it and beat it for Ray Tracing and the TI Super is going to smoke it
The real question will be "Is the 4070 Ti Super worth the extra $90 over a RX 7900 XT?"
When I first saw comparisons back when the xt came out I remember seeing it out performing the 4070 TI.
If its this close vs 4070S then the TIS will own it.
The 7900XT has a 12% relative performance increase over the 4070Ti. I don't know where you get your info, but this is according to Techpowerup.
The 4070ti Super will easily be worth more than the 90$ over 7900xt. You're getting better raster, better rt, better upscaling, better frame gen, all the while you're not being gimped by the 12gb vram tred nvidia has followed in the 4070ti. I think it'll easily smoke the 7900xt. Either the 7900xt goes below 650 (might be possible as 4070s is 600) or lower OR the 4070ti Super is gonna increase in price. Imagine 800$ being the old 400-500$ as the sweet spot :/ this is what zero competition does to a market. Extremely disappointing 4 years from both nvidia and AMD in every price tier below $1200+
@@mannyman139 Only in a couple of AMD sponsored games, most it was a dead heat and it fell behind with Ray Tracing ..... The TI Super is a different die than the other 4070's, it's moved up to an AD103 plus a 256 bus and I suspect it's being made from excess 4080 chips they didn't sell and won't be good enough for a 4080 Super Source is Techspot but basically it's based on a Hardware Unboxed video of a 50 game test suite ...
" After a massive round of benchmarking, we've found that the 7900 XT and 4070 Ti are neck and neck at 1440p on average. Though that shouldn't come as a surprise as the Radeon 7900 XT was just 4% faster on average in our day-one review where we separated the rasterization and ray tracing results."
I never thought I'd say it... I NEVER use upscaling, but Avatar has been looking pretty amazing with 1440p Unobtanium mode on with FSR3 Quality and Frame Gen. It's seriously hard to tell the difference.. it's just a smoother experience. 7900XTX 5800X3D 32GB Ram CL14 for reference.
So the 7900 XT has a modest performance advantage in rasterization, and the extra 8GB of VRAM will undoubtedly give it more long-term viability, but the 4070 Super's proprietary RTX technologies and superior Ray Tracing performance has me feeling that the 7900 XT really has to drop down to at least $650 to remain competitive at all.
I'm sure AMD doesn't like that reality but the 4070 Super is simply too strong an option at $600 in the current market.
I suspect it'll be a similar story with the 7900 XTX, once the 4070 Ti Super comes out.
"So the 7900 XT has a modest performance advantage in rasterization"
You so easily bought the lie...wow! It's a whole lot more than "modest" in actuality. This guy is now practically trying to sell Nvidia cards for them the numbers are so cooked. Why you people don't do your own testing at home to keep these guys honest i'll never know.
@@out42c Bro most people are not out here personally testing gpus and figuring out which is better. Which is why they go to reviewers.
That takes time and money most people don't have.
@@out42c what the fuck are you even talking about lmao, the 7900XT is 17% better on average in raster according to TechPowerUP, and it's a tiny-ass lead compared to how much cutting-edge tech you're losing.
40% more performance is modest
@@shortstaccck7965 If they're not testing themselves they should not be making uniformed gross statements then should they? What's more, these creators should be called out for what is a lack of integrity. They sold their souls for money that YOU might be duped.
Been watching you since I bought my 7900 XT back in June, I may have gotten this card instead if it had existed even though I'm an AMD fanboy. That price diff is just to much. 650 is definitely the sweet spot.
You sound like a PC enthusiast that's happy with their purchase and is able to evaluate the market objectively. If you were a fanboy you'd be accusing him of being a paid shill and faking the numbers. It's so bizarre some people and how emotional they become. Thing is as someone that loves PC hardware and all the tech I think Daniel does a pretty good job in his comparisons. He makes a case for either product highlighting the pros and cons. He than shares his thoughts and personal opinion. I don't always agree with the guy but that's ok.
650 is very low price for 20gb card when equivalent are at least 800$. Thats very good price if u can get one and better values than 4070ti with 12gb even than 4070 ti super with 16 gb coz u can use gpu not only for gaming but for work to and raster performance of 7900xt is higher.
@@meltinsr Should the 3060 12GB cost more than the 3070ti 8GB based on your logic? The 7900xt has too weak a chip for 20GB, 16GB is enough for it, like the 6950xt.
@Sayan2233 7900xt is faster than 6950xt in raster and ray tracing. I had 6950xt changed for 7900xtx and have to 4070 so if u calculate and u do the math right 7900xtx is way better work card than every other that has less vram specialy in video editing.
@@meltinsr There is very little difference in performance between the 6950xt and 7900xt. The 7900xt survived because Nvidia had a gap between $600 for the 4070 and $1200 for the 4080. The $800 4070ti was a weak solution. Now 4080c is $1000, 4070ti super is $800, 4070 super (almost similar to 4070ti) is $600. Amd is trapped. The 7900xt should cost $600 for there to be any interest in it. even $710 for 7900xt now is overprice
its really going to be 7900xt vs the 4070ti super that will be the decision point/comparison. Wish AMD would have gone for the jugular here and went straight to $699 on the 7900xt.
Agreed. In my opinion, $649-$699.
@@anthonybaker5199 was thinking 650 originally but then would run into a cannibalisation issue with 7800xt and they would have to push that price down as well. Not that that would be a bad thing but probably unrealistic.
The problem for me is power draw. I don't live in moms basement, and I pay my own electricity. It's not exactly cheap either. There are times when the 7900xt is using over 100 more watts. Once you factor in power the true cost of ownership is more like around $250+ after 4 years. That's assuming rates also don't go up in that time. In this case, it could be a $300+ difference after factoring upfront cost and cost of ownership over time. With more and more titles baking in RT by default Nvidia starts looking better and better from an effeciancy and RT standpoint. If RDNA 4 wants to make a splash AMD needs to fix their gross power consumption and increase RT substantially.
Yeah the only 2 knocks are Watts and RT when it comes to AMD cards ..
I undervolted my 6950 XT so it went from 330-373 watts down to 240 and only lost a few frames in the process so I'm happy with them numbers but yes AMD needs to really step up their game when it comes to RT...
It's crazy that the 4070 Super a $600 card can outperform my 6950 Xt which was about $1,100 on release day I myself have a 4070 to test out RT and really I guess my eyes are just bad I don't see enough to put RT over 120+ frames so I went back to my 6950 XT and gave my son the 4070.
Yea the Watts are making me squeamish. I really want to Jump to team red as I would rather have raw raster so I do not need to use upscaling in the first place. But the extra cost added by the power draw is not negligible here at 0.30 €. And the card is not worth 1000 € over a few years.
Or get a job and dont worry about electricity bills?
@@НААТ stupid comment of the year. I have a job and I'll bet make more than most people in the comments section. An extra $300 is an extra $300. I plan on retiring early and I try to spend my money wisely. AMD cards due to their terrible effeciancy end up costing more than their Nvidia counterparts due to local utility costs.
@@TV-xv1le an extra 300 is nothing if you have decent job. Stop acting like its the end of the world. Thats still cheaper then having to buy a new 1000€ gpu every year cause the old one can't keep up. Unlike amd
The 7900 XT needs to come down in price by about $50, as you mention, to negate the advantage for DLSS that the 4070 Super has.
Interestingly, Galax's 4070 Super HOF with 320w and a +211 MHz (2.711 GHz) core clock is still slower than my RX-7900XT XFX Black Edition with a simple undervolt (3GHz). I would rather have the RX-7900XT.
The 4070 Super is not a good 4K card because of vram limitations and generally lower performance, but if playing lower resolutions it can be a good choice.
Daniel, how has your experience been with AMD drivers for the 70 series cards?
7900 xt over 300 watts of power. YOWZA
its more efficient than a 3090 and about 20% faster but yeh hopefully the next cards will be more efficient.
The image quality difference with DLSS shouldn't be ignored for frame rates. It makes a big difference.
7900XT for $720 = $710 too tempting. I will have to go to Microcenter.
I'll wait for next gen
My 3080s are good enough for roblox n minecraft maybe some paladins , csgo overwatch
3080 is definitely more than enough for e sport games and minecraft
here i will go with 4070 super beause of dlss3 and RT
RDNA3 need to draw 1.5x power and only lead Nvidia by 10% performance need to be talked about more. if it was for CPU comparison then AMD fanboys will sure be all over it.
I have said it before. RDNA 4 needs to drop power draw significantly and increase RT performance. The true cost of AMD gpus is as high and in some cases much higher once you factor in power draw. I suspect the 4070ti super will be a bargain v 7900xt once you factor in power. Something many of these techtubers don't do cause their parents pay the electric bill. Once the ti super comes out the 7900xt needs to drop down to like $600 to be semi attractive.
At this point I don’t think RX7900XT is a good value for the power compared with RTX4070s. This is very sad.
How do you have a video for every option of videocards i’m looking to buy? Almost the same day i change my mind and go with another gpu!
He's smart! I guess that's what you'd expect from a math teacher.
7900xt stomps the 4070 super. You can undervolt this card to pull 270 and it barely loses performance. I just dont think 12gb vram will cut it. I hope this 4070 super sits and the scalpers get hosed.
A 18% improvement is not a stomp... Eapecially because you can OC+undervolt the 4070 super and get it close to 4070Ti performance😂 dummie
@@tadejloncar lol it absolutely stomps on a 4070super in raw performance. You must be on the green juice or cognitive dissonance due to buyers remorse. 7 months ago when I wrote this a 4070 super was 600 and a 7900xt was on promo for like 700. So yes on dollar per frame the 7900xt stomps. And now you can get it for 650 or less it stomps even harder now lol.
@@tadejloncar I would also add that on raw raster, a 7900xt outperforms a 4070ti (non super). You must be heavily ingesting green juice to think that the 4070ti is beating a 7900xt in raster. I mean what benchmarks are you even looking at?
Amazing work as always ! Would love to see a 4070 Super vs 3090 comparison though
I have the benchmarking done, and that is my next planned comparison. Hopefully can get it out in the next couple of days.
@@danielowentech woop woop i have a factory overclocked 3080ti that performs to a 3090 so im excited to see your results
Yeah, if it were true. The numbers are totally lying.
Based on Techpowerup it is slower than 3090. So Nvidia obviously lied.
well well , very funny in my poor country difference is 1,08661 just 9% more expensive so i bought rx 7900 xt
upgrade from rx 480 very "little" performance bump, i am very very happy, thanks for the video
Nice video, at these prices I consider the 4070S better value, especially taking in superior DLSS image quality, RT and power draw 😮 sticking to 1440p.
Need to disregard the dlss and raytracing ala nvdia scam because it is still useless at any price level for this generation. For power thing it is kinda given since 4070s is 30% slower than 7900xt unless they turn on dlss and ray tracing for power consumption test.
Now consider that 7900XT started as 900$ MSRP that's wild ;) It's a tough call here but i think 7900XT would take the win if you can get it cheaply that is.
I did the math back when the 7900xt came out , to be a worth while cost to performance upgrade over my (at the time) $550 6800xt the 7900xt would need to be in the $700-750 range .
Thing is my long term goal is to upgrade to a high refresh rate 4k OLED later this year so I'm more in the market for the xtx.
Ultimately it's the monitor that dictates what GPU needed .
A nice thing about the 6800xt , i have plenty of time to wait for what i need it has so much life left in it.
You may get a price cut real soon on the 7900 xtx in a couple of weeks. I got the reference model. I wish I had waited for the AIB instead but can't complain at all.
Wait for the next gen, even a 4090 sucks at 4K.
Also have a 6800XT, and since AFMF came out, I am not even thinking about upgrading, works superbly
@@anthonybaker5199 yah that would be sweet !
the sapphire nitro is what I want , but realistically I will probably get the pulse , but wouldn't complain over the reference model.
Those are the best fit for my computer case .
It it that hard for you people to wait for next gen? That 6800 XT should be more than enough.
Honestly pretty impressed with new 4070 super, I think it would've been great if they could've added even just one or two more gb of vram.
I am curious to see an overclock the XFX Merc Black Edition and the 4070 super. My XFX Black Edition overclocks to 3 GHz which makes a significant difference in the performance.
It's like people forget that additional performance gained by OC is a feature by itself.
In Mexico, 7900XT price is $650USD and the super is 700USD, i went for the 7900XT.
Lets hope the 8000 series has way better raytracing support, a 8800xt at 500 with double raytracing would be a killer for today games
Alan wake 2 new preview driver is said to give pretty good performance on xtx 1440p quality fsr. Said to be about 80-90-ish fps
12 gb cards will never be able to use 100% of its power. You see if daniel owen actually played modern games with that card in 4k on ultra+raytracing... you would see much different results where the game would have all kinds of issues. I wonder why he doesnt show that, instead of automated benchmark videos...4070 would shit itself in any modern title like RE 4 remake.
@@__-fi6xg it might be fine in some games but might not in others, buit its really meant for 1440p, still i think 12gb is low, and if i remember 7900 xt and xtx are selling as 4k, i really thing they are more suited as 1440p, yes they can game at 4k but at latest unreal 5 they will need to use fsr
They didnt hold back, the silicon performed worse than expected. The 7900xtx was supposed to be 5-10% weeaker than the 4090, similar to the 6900xt vs 3090@@mitrovicc-gr9fb
Don't expect much from AMD.
Only time they surprised us with performance in the last 20 years was RDNA2
Hey Daniel! Realy like your Videos! Greatings from Germany!
I want to upgrade my 6800 non XT to either the 4070 super or the 7900xt since in some 1440p games like Star wars Jedi Survivor for example I only get around 50FPS with max settings and no Raytraying. Want to always get at least 60FPS in Games.
The following thoughts occurred to me. As you pointed out already, I think you should always sell your old GPU to fund your new GPU! Everything else would just be plain stupid unless you have endless amounts of money anyway (which I don't, unfortenetly) , but if you have endless money than why not just buy a 4090 and that's it, right?
It recently occured to me that many TH-camrs who make those GPU Benchmark videos often forget to specifcally point that out to their viewship (not you!), which makes so many people forget about that which is a bad mistake, I think, when calculation your FPS per Dollar/Euro gains. So let's jsut say I get around 330 Euros for my 6800 on Ebay. My Calculation is as follows:
The cheapest 4070super costs about 600€ currently in Germany so I have to pay another 270€ for about 30 percentish more FPS compared to the RX 6800. The cheapest 7900XT cost 740€. So that would be a 410€ investment for me but I would gain about 60 percent more FPS (which obviously would be double the FPS Gain comparde to the 4070Super).
So I have to pay an extra 52 percent (410€/270€) for double the FPS gain compared to the 4070Super (60%FPS gain for the AMD card compared to 30% Nvida Card). (Just for Math illiterate readers of this comment: 270€ would be 100 % 410€ would be 152 %) - but for double the Perfomance increase - so 200% increase.
Aditionally (which is just as important): The 7900xt is just worth more than the 4070super. So when I upgrade again in a few years I will get more money out of my 7900xt when selling it then to fund my upgrade in let's say three to four years. (That is an important factor, since we talk about a reasonable timeframe of maybe three to four years and not 20years or so)
Let's just say, instead of the 140€ Price difference now, I am getting half of it, which is 70€, more for the 7900xt when selling it compared to the 4070super in a few years. So I have to cut that down from my 410€ pricing as well (not factoring in inflation and many other potentially unforseable variables that might occur in the next few years). So 410€ - 70€ would be 340€ in the long run for the AMD Card compared to 270€ for the Nvidia Card. So I would have to pay an extra 26% (340€/270€) (in the long run!) for the AMD card for double the FPS gain. So since I think I might just stretch my budget that extra 140€ for the 7900xt I think I will get the 7900xt.
An addition factors might be that the 20GB advantage for the AMD 7900xt might be worth even more moneywise (relatively!) when selling it in three to four years to finance my upgrade then, than it is now compared to the 4070 super. SInce games uses more VRAM over time (as you so often points out) and gamers in the futre will want a have futureproof VRAM capacity in three years or four years time just as gamers want to be futureproof now. So maybe I will still even get 100€ (instead of 70€) more for my 7900xt in three years time compared to the 4070super when selling it.
And: FSR will be way more advanced then, than it is now. And with FSR 3 and especially FS3.1 there is a trend apparent that FSR lowers the gap to DLSS with every new update. And this trend is likely going to continue since, as I read, PS6 and next XBox, what ever it will be called then, will also feature AMD Hadware and they already try to implement FSR3 in Console gaming in current the generation of consoles. And Playstion as well as Microsoft will have a yery high incentive in telling AMD to get their FSR (as well as their Frame Generation) fixed! (fixed is such a strong word but I really think as Upscaling and Frame Generation are such new inventions and as past has shown again and again that if one company has a way better product in tech as a technology is still in it's infancy it usually doesn't take to much time for competitors to be able to close the gap to some extend (in this case DLSS vs FSR). But all of that still is mere speculation of coure (especially since Nvidia has a monopoly in AI and who knows which miracles they will work with that in the near future... But on the other hand if they completly new invent computer graphics with AI they will find a way to make you pay for it as already seen in the fact that Nvidia's frame Generation, which is, correct me if I'm wrong, only limeted to the 4000series GPUS and the 5000series will most likely be released in the not so far future).
Ok. Whereas the math I presented is very sound, I think, everthing else remains in the realm of pure speculation.
Wow, writing that comment really made me see things much clearer. My intention when starting to write this comment was actually to ask you given the decision I have to make, because I really really don't want to invest three quarter of a thousand Euros for just a GPU especially since, unfortunately, I haven't won the lottery in recent times and 600€ was actually my absolut limit. But considering the Math and my desire to have a good gaming experience I think I will go for the 7900xt.
Ah, I forgot one more important thing which isn't mentioned anywhere on youtube as well. I, as most gamers probably, don't have a 4k Monitor as 4k Monitors with high refresh rates are still quit expensive. (Don't know any statistics about that, though...) I only have a 1440p Monitor. But AMD offers (Nvidia probably does as well, don't know about that) "Virtual Super Resolution". And the Image actually looks way better in many games when rendering a game in 4k native or in older titles even in 8k. I tried Raytracing in some currenct games with my 6800 (which cripples my Framerate of course) but I wasn't that impressed with the visual improvements. Whereas running a game in 4K native massively improved visual Quality for me in many games. No one mentions that. Maybe many youtubers, think in the back of their mind, ok, the 4070super is super for 1440p now whereas the 7900xt is kind of an overkill for 1440p as things stand today and will be a bit weak for 4k in the near future since it's more of an entrylevel card for 4k Gaming in most games... I don't know but for anyone using AMD (who has read my comment up to this point) try Super Resolution more often! It beats Raytracing in my opion.
Daniel, If you (or anyone) read my comment till the end: Can you make a video about the two main points of this comment regarding the math?
(1) facturing in what you get for your old GPU first and only then doing the math. That of corse always depends on the persons current GPU which makes making videos in that mannor more demanding.
(2) the more expensive GPU will still be worth more money if you sell it in a few years. (Maybe TH-camrs think like: Ok, If I buy a house that will be my asset forever whereas a GPU is tech and tech loses it's value so fast that it will have zero value in a few years so NEVER tell people to "invest" in tech... I don't know)
Noone evertalks about these factors on TH-cam when deciding what GPU to buy in making the optimal choise...
Love your Videos! Keep it up!
Nvidia beats amd because of the better efficiency
Wrong. Amd overvolts their hardware so they undervolt well
@@lifemocker85 ya so can nvidia with msi afterburner u amd fanboi
@@Fronioll9973 both are so efficient that you dont notice any difference. Ngreedia is just overpriced and vram gimped
@@lifemocker85 avg amd fanboy
@@Fronioll9973 truth seem to hurt ngreedia trolls
damn the 7900 used about 50% more power for about the same perf. the 4070 super would be great if limited to 150W, but I wouldn't pay 700€ for it, I think it should be priced at around 500€
i still wouldnt buy cuz it have 12gb, what people makes to buy nvidia gpus are software options it have, dlss, rt, fg, but with 12gb it will run out fast, but could alway decrease texture quality but who would do that for 700 euro product, also lets be fair, if person can buy gpu that cost 700 or more, who cares about how much power it consumes, 4070 ti super at other hand is better option, it will have 16gb and will be strong
Wrong. Amd overvolts their hardware so they undervolt well
This seals the deal. Architecturally the 4070 Super is miles and miles ahead of the 7900XT. 220 Watt is extremely good, I will pick one up. Yeah, it's very expensive, even more so in Europe, but the card is good. Very good. No shade on people having different opinions.
Only morons get 12gb gpu in 2020s
RX 7900 XTX was $799 for one day. so RX 7900 XT needs to go down to $599, not $709.
Even though this isnt the most fair comparison its crazy to see the 4070 super can beat the 7900 xt by a lot in ray tracing. The 4070 super is actually the better deal here which is crazy to think
i wish nvidia had a same vram : bandwidth cards just like 7900xt, 7800xt.. within similar price they are charging toooo much for such 12gb:192bit
only hope is the battlemage, their a770 did really well despite their driver issues+ tdp but they have worked really hard and still working on improvement. and giving 16gb vram :256bit bus + good rt performance on that price point is just insane and none amd or nvidia have ever made such a card like that
Yep. The RTX 4070S is a $600 GPU with 12gb/192bit VRAM… the same as the RTX 3060, their last gen card that costs half as much.
It should be 16Gb/256bit minimum.
I’m also looking forward to seeing what Intel offer with Battlemage.
I have an RX6800 and was considering upgrading to a 4070S or 7900 XT, but I think I’m going to hold out for the next gen.
Thanks for another very interesting comparison with the respective price points in mind. :) As a small note, as someone that goes back and forth between my consoles and PC a lot, I tend to keep increasing the resolution and settings as long as I can still maintain 1% lows above 30 fps in most genres. So the 4K Ultra settings are usually the most relevant for me.
Daniel Owen you’ve sold your soul to Nvidia with their 12gb cards
So the mantra is: Whatever NVIDIA does, buy AMD because they have better "price to performance". Even when AMD cards consume a lot more power per fps, have worse ray tracing performance, poorer driver stability and smaller market than NVIDIA (hence less support from games). Also why do you compare a 600$ (RTX 4070S) card with 900$ card (RX 7900XT)? it's so unfair and sad.
Wrong. Amd overvolts their hardware so they undervolt well
I would get the 7900xt for that price. I went all out and got 7900XTX for 999 in feb. 2023. Never regreted it. Amd Uses more of the vram for sure. I had up to 21-23 gb usage at times with 7900xtx.
The thing that most people ignore or just don't notice is that while AMD GPUs appear to use more VRAM compared to NVIDIA ones, in an apples to apples comparison NVIDIA cards use more system ram instead. This is very evident and noticeable in a video Daniel did not too long ago comparing NVIDIA and AMD VRAM usages which people also commented about.
it uses more vram if it has more to use.. thats just how it is@@SamaelGray
@@SamaelGray yea but that performance difference between 4060and 7600 at 1440p is huge.
i think it was around 30%
Daniel I love your channel! Always fun to see how these gpus compare especially when I’m considering upgrading from my 6700xt to a 4070. I’m not sure if I should get the super yet considering I can find 4070s for under 500, but it’s something I’m working through. Keep up the good work!
Ray tracing deniers are in shambles.
What do you mean
Exactly❤
The XFX Merc Black Edition is awesome BTW and overclocks well.
For longevity the 7900 XT is worth it for sure, especially if it drops bellow $700, but even at $710 it looks ok, however I would wait for the 4070 TI Super because if you have $600 or $710 for a GPU, you most likely also have $800.
Damn you can tell AMD is paying for how late they jumped on the RT train, it's been two gens they seem to catch up on nvidia in terms of perf/price until we bring RT perfs. They really need to bet on that and AI for the next generation or else they'll always look like the alternative brand to go for when nvidia is too expensive instead of looking like an actual competitor.
Naw, AMD's approach was probably the correct one(for their product line)
AMD is using less dedicated RT hardware and just adding a ray accelrator per CU
which isn't the best for performance, but probably saves a lot of design cost with many different products like console chips, low power APUs and high performance GPUs
I think amd is trying to avoid previous manufacturing price mistakes made with the Vega GPUs(that HBM was so expensive) so they are taking a smaller, more conservative approach
@@krazybonnie5523 oh okay, i had no idea ahah
When doing cross-brand Graphics Cards Could you include the power ussage graph aswell? should be in afterburner.
As much as I am an AMD fan for CPU's, I honestly cant justify their prices for GPUs. I dont use ray tracing, but the cuda, tensor cores, etc makes the nvidia a MUCH better value. AI will be coming to local PC's built into apps and Windows soon and if AMD doesnt up its game fast they wont be even on my radar. 4070S vs 7900xt even at same price i would pick the 4070.
You certainly do not need 1k worth of GPU to take advantage of an AI features in windows.
Windows features will run more than fine in 7900 XT. Also AI uses memory and 20GB is a lot more than 12GB. Also don't confuse 4090 AI power to 4070 class of GPUs.
Cuda is slowly being phased out of AI and soon the production workflows. As it turns out, most large companies don't like to be a the whims of another company's black box tech.
@@sounghungi If it was that easy those companies wouldnt still be buying billions worth of H100's . AMD drivers have a long way to go.
@@OrjonZ Don't confuse VRAM with compatability.
man, super video, congratulatios, you arent a fan boy like others, but, today with FSR FG this video changes, no?
"Slashes prices" Seems to be an NA thing. Here in Sweden despite the "slashing" the 7900XT is still €120 - 200 more than a 4070 Super (which is also the same price as a regular 4070)
Really excited to see the 7900XT vs 4070TI Super video!
spoiler: 7900 XT dies
@@cyberkekosis dude stop spoiling I haven’t watched the video from the future yet!!!
Damn this channel is better than hardware unboxed..
it is enough to make an argument, but sadly I think it is not enough to maintain their lead over NV in overall product with a price cut this small.
the 7900XT is having more driver issues that cause stutters LOL
and nvidia 40** card are melting almost to a point that they needed to be recalled.
@@imretix8081 recalled? 4090 are selling for higher than launch prices LMAO
so did the 3090 that's just how nvidia makes money they charge more for thin air@@krizby87
in Europe the 4070 super starting price is 670 euro for a 2 fan shit looking model. if you want something like 3 fan or cooler looking then it is going to cost 750+ euro. ATM you can find the 7900xt for 740-750 euro since the lowering of the prices. At this point i will wait for prime day or some shit and get a 7900xt and f ngreedia
4070 super is handicapped by 12Gigs of VRAM, which is a bummer to future proof.. at least it could've got 16GB VRAM. Same 16GB for 4070 Ti Super and 20GB for 4080 Super. This would be perfect and would kill AMD out of the competition
Not with ngreedia overprices
But you cannot leave out that the 709.99 7900xt cards are 3 fan AIB with bigger coolers and more performance. The 599.99 4070 super is only for 2 fan cards which will not cool or overclock as well and also will effect life span of the cards. You should compare 3 fan AIB to 3 fan AIB for accurate price comparison. It would be 649.99 vs 709.99 for much more vram and performance. Get the 7900xt unless you only like Nvidia then get that but if you do don't deny you bought it for only that reason because the 7900xt is a much better value for money with those cards. Oh and I prefer nvidia have a rtx 4080 rog strix I bought it because it looks incredible and does great at 1440p but was not a better value vs the 7900xtx.
Also why do you guys only test using the small % of games that use or have optional RT? It is really deceiving to 90% of gamer who don't use or care for RT it really does not add any value it actually hurst game play much more than it helps. You should be showing a majority of non RT games not the opposite sorry but that is very shady and Deceptive. the 7900xt is much fast, period, when you factor in that out of all games only a small minority have RT and the rest do not. For this reason I find most benchmarks and comparisons invalid.
He benchmarks new games, not 2yr+ old games. Lots of new AAA titles have RT or Lumen. Also, you can buy the cheapest 4070 Super and just flash a 350w+ vbios onto it for FREE. This gives it increased OC headroom for zero money. For 7900xt you have to pay more for access to higher power limits. Overall, I still think buying anything other than a 4090 this generation will be obsolete for newer titles in 2-3yrs. Even the 4090 will only be a 1440p with upscaling gpu soon.
You don't really need 3 fans for a small and cool GPU like the 4070 Super, it's putting out just as much heat per fan as a 3-fan 7900XT
The 7900xt needs more fans because they use 100 more watts.
$650 4070super gigabyte gaming approx. Sapphire Impulse 7900xt for $710. It’s more correct to compare with the 4070 super msi ventus 3x - $630. The result is that the 7900xt is 12% higher, it has no technology and is slightly faster in raster. This worked before when the 7800xt cost $100 less than the 4070. It doesn't work when the 7900xt costs $100 more than the 4070super.
My ram tho. 12gb will not be suitable in 2 years
Don't you guys love when someone shows that much passion and devotion to help us understand those complicated topics? I sure do! Thanks Daniel! :D
No wonder AMD owners hate raytracing and upscaling 😂
I think upscaling is nice on 200-300€ cards, if I pay more than that, I expect the card to be capable to run native res
@@iamspencerx not when DLSS looks better than many games TAA implementations. At this point "native res" is a meaningless term in any game with TAA, as long as it looks sharp who cares. Though yes, with AMD you have no choice but to run native res so i guess it's more important there. For NVIDIA DLSS offers more FPS, access to frame gen and ray reconstruction all while looking better than TAA.
In 2024, we shouldn't need upscaling at 1080p or 1440p, especially not on 27-inch monitors. Just like Frame Generation is simply garbage. Games should simply be optimized and graphics card manufacturers should promote raw performance and not "extenders"
@@BerndKlein-ef1dg have you used frame gen? It’s not “garbage” lmao, it’s fucking amazing and anybody who actually used it agrees.
@@crispybottom no it doesn't, all reviews would tell you to only upscale 1440p to 4k, other than that it's a significant quality loss
4070 Super is NOT direct competitor to RX7900XT, that was 4070Ti. Now talking about 4070Ti Super , that one is threatening RX 7900XTX for sure.
Hmmmm no.
4080 super is, not the 4070ti super
@@Salciiiiii No. 4080 competes with 7900XTX. They are also closer pricewise than 7900XT to 4080/Super.
AMD sadly has nothing to compete with 4090, as we all know. Not that it matters much given the crazy price of 4090.
COD people will want the 7900 XT, IMO. It's interesting that the 4070 Super consistently reads higher temps, while drawing 100+ watts less power. Is that just a difference in how temp is read on the GPUs? I tend to think the 4070 Ti would be a more direct comparison to the 7900 XT. Perhaps not.
Man thanks for this vid! I was pulling my hair out thinking my 7900xt was under performing. Avatar is demanding. With some tweaks I am getting better performance. Thanks.
7900xt is clearly the better 1440p and 4k card considering it has 20gb on board. If the 4070S had 16gb, id agree with your final assessment. But for now, 7900xt is the go to as long as its price is under $720 and 4070S stays above $600, which most seem to be around the $640 range.
The percentage in performance gain over the 4070 isn’t great enough justify 100 more dollars and worse upscaling.
Both the 4070 and 7900XT are expensive 1440p cards that struggle in 4K, unless you’re dropping settings.
4070 ti super will not cost that much more than the 7900 xt, and has better features to boot. This price drop is not good enough imo.
Theres not enough of a performance difference here to justify paying over a 100 more for 7900xt instead of 4070 super. Especially if you bring in RT+DLSS in to the equation.
12gb vram is enough for the next few years, there is no need for 20gb vram. Games are developed with consoles in mind. A few unoptimised titles does not mean we need 16-20gb cards.
@@stirfrysensei Sorry nearly $700 for a 12gb gpu is sad.
@@stirfrysensei Actually, in some older titles not uncommon to see it beat the 4070 by upwards of 50%
@@chy.0190 That is patently false as you can already see the 12GB getting capped out in games out already today. If my card needs to last 4 years I would not buy 12GB cards atm.
I exclusively play in 4k, at least upscaled. Dont care about ray tracing and probably wont for at least a few more years. Bought the 7900xt as soon as I saw price drop. Additionally, I'm coping and hoping that FSR will improve to meet DLSS. There's lots of room for improvement as outside of RT, this is the biggest argument people make to buy Nvidia over AMD. But as is, I think FSR is fine. Prefer those higher framerates in 4k non RT
I suspect this 7900xt might come down to about $660 after the 4070 ti super comes out if it launches at msrp. Maybe i’m wrong, but idk
Imagine the 4070 s ti..its goin to demolish 7900 xt
Well if it's 5% - 10% slower than a 4080, it will be around %10 - %15 slower than an XTX which in turn is around %20 faster than an XT. So that means the 4070 ti Super will probably be between %5 - %10 faster in raster performance than an XT. That's good performance, but I wouldn't call it demolish.
Everything depends on the price anyway tbh.
Recently I bought a 7900 XTX, because I found one for €250 less than they usually cost where I live. So €1.000 for the card. Compare that to the cheapest RTX 4080 which costs €1.419 and the choice is pretty quickly made. Paying a 40+ % premium for a card that's 5% slower in rasterization would be kind of daft, imo. Especially if that 4080 model is an Eagle or Ventus cards, which have notoriously weak coolers. A card with the same Asus cooler as the one I bought would be €1.499 (so basically a 50% premium).
Anyway, if the 4070 ti Super comes out at its MSRP of $800, it will most likely be around €975 - €1.000 for the cheapest models here (probably around 1.050 - 1.100 for the models with a better cooler), which brings it in the territory of the XTX. The XT saw a little price drop of around €20 when I checked it yesterday, which means it costs €780 right now.
But yeah again... different regions, different prices, different situations of whether a card has the better value or not. In another country it might be a completely different story.
60% more power consumption for 10% more performance is really not worth it in my opinion. AMD needs to price 7900 series a lot more aggressively, like $600 for 7900XT, and $750 for 7900XTX.
Amd overvolts their hardware so they undervolt well
In my country 4070s cost about 800$, around 1000 for 4070ti and 1200 for rx7900xtx/ rtx 4070ti S
The price probably won't go down because they need to push all the old rtx model 😭
I love how we all not actin like 5k series aint gonna be a quick pickup
DLSS looks better. But does it really matter? Because most people uses 27" and smaller monitor. At that size, most games will look similar with both upscaling at quality.
i cant say for 27 1440p but at 21,5 at 1080p if its well implemented u will notice but it will be minor, at distance that most of time u wont pay attention, in ets 2 i play its flickering at native and quality of picture in other games that have fsr still looks better than that, cant say its like that in all cases cuz i didnt test every fsr game
Try playing Darktide with FSR on on a 23'' 1080p monitor. It's like you're going blind and need glasses, not to mention all the shimmering at oblique angles. FSR is that bad in detail-heavy games and people downplay it in these comment sections.
@@krixtorei if you are using a 7800xt or higher.....why would you even want to user FSR at 1080p though and it's like that for MANY games. If FSR is required but doesn't look good in a particular game just drop settings a bit it's that simple.
@@pdmerritt I was answering a very specific statement about the tech itself.
The fact of the matter is, regarding the original post, FSR is undeniably worse both in visual quality and in the eye strain effect upscaling causes compared to DLSS under pretty much every circumstance even in sub 27'' monitors despite what was claimed in the OP. No, they would not look anywhere near the same like he claims.
No one's talking about performance here.
@@krixtorei You totally missed the context of what i'm saying here. Scaling isn't mandatory....if you own a AMD product and the scaling looks particularly bad. You can usually turn down the settings a bit where you no longer need to scale the image to have a playable frame rate. Also, the way you talk is FSR is so bad that it can kill your gameplay....I have a 7800xt GPU and my best friend has a 4080. Yes I can see the difference between the two but to say it always looks terrible is far from the truth. Also, it varies depending upon game. Robocop for example is one game where it does look bad and I simply would never turn it on in that game. Doesn't really need it though as it has quite playable frame rates at native.
What really doesnt make sense is when you're spending sooo much on a GPU that you are stressing over pretty much a small price. Frame generation seems to drop kick AMD in the genitals. All that AMD Vram seems to do NOTHING for the AMD GPU's. In the future when that vram is more useful you likely won't have the power to be playing at 1440p+ and 80fps+.
I think everyone will go with a 4070 TI Super. You get that 16gigs vram for the future even. Lower energy consumption (assuming, seems clear for Nvidia). Frame generation vs unknow future vram consumption. Likely will be priced as fair as we can get it. The 4080 Super will cost less, but going from 2 kidneys to 1 is not a good deal.
Wrong. Overpriced
I wanted to change my 4070 to 4070 super, but changed to 4080 super. It's great card for 4k gaming
I agree with some people saying that this 4070 Super is a bit late to the party but tbh it's the only card that has the "right price" at $600 right now.
The others have prices that only would have made sense one year ago. 7800XT should be $400-$450, 4070(normal) $500, 7900XT $650, and 7900XTX $850.
The 4070ti Super seems fine at 800$ if performance is what we expect but the 4080 super should be dropped even further to $950 because you don't get any extra VRAM.
And even then that 600 dollar price tag is still a bit much compared to cheaper options
Youre overpricing them also
Daniel, I really like your videos. But I don't understand why people compare the 4070 Super to the 7900XT. This is a card against the 7800XT. It is 10% faster in raster and 40% faster in RT while eating 15% less while being 20% more expensive. so it is absolutely on par with the 7800XT in terms of price/value. It is clear that the 7900XT will compete with the 4070 Ti super.
Imo, I think AMD needs to drop the 7900XT needs to be at sub $650 price point as image quality with upscaling and fps are not looking favourable against Nvidia’s option and features. Yes AMD come along way from Radeons software beginning with FSR 1.0 …… but they’ve a lot more to do to be called a true competitor to Nvidia. I’m saying this as mainly an Nvidia user, but also an AMD Radeon user!
Lol.. with the 7900XT you dont need upscaling. You nvidia bros have been seriously conditioned.
Disagree. Radeon is competitive now.
@@НААТLiterally. Not a Nvidia hater or an AMD fanboy, but that’s the thing people don’t realize. You don’t need upscaling lol
@@walkemdown4127and even if you need upscaling, fsr doesn't look as bad as people say (at least on higher resolutions) and xess looks pretty much as good as dlss now.
Dumbass deniers of the superior image quality, technologies and power efficiency of nvidia, only because they choose raderon, they stupidly have to flood the internet with their lies of superiority where’s obviously none. RT is very present in games and yeah ots here to stay, dlss quality improves the image against native in many cases.
I would rather have a 4070ti Super for $800, over the 7900xt at $709-$750.
Why does nvedia fg doesn't double the fps it's way lower than double
Might be adding 1 frame every two?