Radeon 7900 Reviews

[Stuka87]

Will update this list as more come along.

ArsTechnica:
(Ryzen 5800X3D, Asus ROG Crosshair VIII Dark Hero, 64GB DDR4-3200, Windows ???)
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/202...0-gpus-are-great-4k-gaming-gpus-with-caveats/

Gamers Nexus:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=We71eXwKODw

Guru3D:
(Ryzen 5950X, ASUS X570 Crosshair VIII HERO, 32 GB (4x 8GB) DDR4 3600 MHz, Windows 10)
https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-review,1.html

Hardware Canucks
(Ryzen 7700X, Asus X670E ROG Crosshair hero, 32GB DDR5-6000, Windows 11)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3XPNr506Dc

Hardware Unboxed:
(Ryzen 5800X3D, MSI MPG X570S Carbon Max WiFi, 32GB DDR4-3200, Windows 11)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UFiG7CwpHk

Igor's Lab:
(Ryzen 7950X, MSI MEG X670E Ace,32GB DDR5 6000)
https://www.igorslab.de/en/amd-rade...giant-step-ahead-and-a-smaller-step-sideways/

Jay's Two Cents:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yq6Yp2Zxnkk

KitGuruTech:
(Intel 12900K, MSI MAG Z690 Unified, 32GB DDR5)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qThrADqleD0

Linus Tech Tips:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBJ-vo6Ri9c

Paul's Hardware:
(Ryzen 7950X, Asus X670E ROG Crosshair Hero, 32GB DDR5-6000, Windows 11)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q10pefkW2qg

PC Mag:
(Intel 12900K, Asus ROG Maximus Z690 Hero, 32GB 5600MHz, Windows 11)
https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx

Tech Power Up:
(Intel 13900K, ASUS Z790 Maximus Hero, 2x 16 GB DDR5-6000 MHz, Windows 10)
AMD: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx/
ASUS: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asus-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-tuf-oc/
XFX: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/xfx-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-merc-310-oc/

Tech Spot:
(Ryzen 5800X3D, MSI MPG X570S, 32GB of dual-rank, dual-channel DDR4-3200 CL14, Windows ???)
https://www.techspot.com/review/2588-amd-radeon-7900-xtx/

TechTesters:
(Intel 13900K, ASUS ROG Maximus Z790 HERO, 32GB DDR5-6000, Windows 11)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uQh4GkPopQ

 

[zinfamous]

And your account is how old?

Don't do that. No one cares and it makes you look stupid.

 

[zinfamous]

Steve makes no mention of that in the review. Its a very misleading bench given that all other games are maxed out and readers might not catch it and assume its like the others. Sorry I dont follow HUB as closely as you to be aware of their daily activities. But reviews like this generate their highest traffic, incl 1000s of unaware (and potentially misled) readers like myself.

Now this is fair comment, and how things should be criticzed. It is indeed misleading and I don't really follow them that much (I don't like youtubers in general and reviews like that are just painful to watch), but watching that earlier I also wondered wtf was going with that. It makes zero sense...and literally no explanation in a video that you would expect vastly more first timers watching.

He needs to be more transparent with such things.

 

[alexruiz]

And you find this surprising, that a faster CPU would enable higher performance on a GPU?

Shocking! What did you think of HWUB's review which used a 5800X3D?

A majority of reviewers used Zen 4 CPUs because Zen 4 is the fastest gaming CPU
Like it or not, Zen 4 is the fastest gaming CPU, end of story.

My surprise was that Ryzen runs better with Radeon, and Radeon runs better on Ryzen, so seeing a larger margin of victory over the RTX 4080 on RPL was surprising.
However, when analyzing the numbers a little further, you see that the stronger Zen 4 is allowing the RTX to perform better compared to the new Radeons, hence the smaller margin of victory vs the 4080 on Zen 4.
Driver immaturity for sure, but surprising nonetheless.

 

[tamz_msc]

A majority of reviewers used Zen 4 CPUs because Zen 4 is the fastest gaming CPU
Like it or not, Zen 4 is the fastest gaming CPU, end of story.

Zen 4 ain't the fastest in gaming.

Page 131 - Question - Raptor Lake - Official Thread

Page 131 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

forums.anandtech.com

 

[alexruiz]

Zen 4 ain't the fastest in gaming.

Page 131 - Question - Raptor Lake - Official Thread

Page 131 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

forums.anandtech.com

Zen 4 is the fastest.
You obviously didn't analyze what the numbers you liked mean, you just picked one that validated your preconception of your favorite team being on top.
Furthermore, if the place has something like 3dcenter in the name it sound more official so even more reason to pick it.

That compilation is reviews from Zen 4 LAUNCH day.
Because you obviously don't understand how that detail is relevant, I'll explain it simply.
The Zen 4 performance today is not the performance at launch.

At Zen 4 launch, the newest AGESA for Zen 4 was combo AM5 1.0.0.1 D
Furthermore, AMD chipset drivers version was 4.08.09.2337.
That combo was rushed, and left performance on the table.

Fast forward a few weeks, the latest AGESA for Zen 4 is combo AM5 1.0.0.4, with 1.0.0.3A bringing a major performance jump. There have been at least 3 major AGESA updates since launch day.
Chipset drivers are now 4.11.15.342, 2 newer releases since, with the one in October bringing a major upgrade in power plans and core affinity specifically for AM5.
The performance for Zen 4 is now much more consistent, higher boosts on peak loads, higher clocks on sustained loads.

At launch, even after assuming that the reviewers updated the BIOS and installed chipsets drivers to the latest available, Zen 4 back then wasn't what it is today.
You remember some reviews posted fairly recently by HWUB, TechSpot and Jarrods Tech that show Zen 4 on top?
Yes, those reviews maligned by the fanboys of your team because they show team red now on top.

Grab those newer reviews, analyze the ABSOLUTE numbers for RPL, meaning the fps, not the relative number vs Zen4.
Compare the RPL numbers to any other review of your liking with comparable hardware. Are the numbers different?
They are not, if anything, their RPL numbers are better than other places, so they are not painting RPL worse light.
RPL is losing now because Zen 4 got much better.

Using Zen 4 launch day numbers is disingenuous at best, slimy at worst.
If you are looking for truth, you'll accept the fact that Zen 4 is getting better and better.
If you want, however, to prove that your team is the best, you don't need to see any data, you already have made up your mind, and will try to choose anything that validates your point.

So, what are you, disingenuous or slimy?
Same goes for your buddy @Carfax83
I have asked him to come and show how those reviews that showed Zen 4 on top handicapped RPL performance.
He has not shown it, and he won't because those reviews show RPL performing as it should in absolute numbers.
In the relative numbers vs the competition RPL looks worse now because the competition has refined its performance.

 

[tamz_msc]

Zen 4 is the fastest.
You obviously didn't analyze what the numbers you liked mean, you just picked one that validated your preconception of your favorite team being on top.
Furthermore, if the place has something like 3dcenter in the name it sound more official so even more reason to pick it.

That compilation is reviews from Zen 4 LAUNCH day.
Because you obviously don't understand how that detail is relevant, I'll explain it simply.
The Zen 4 performance today is not the performance at launch.

At Zen 4 launch, the newest AGESA for Zen 4 was combo AM5 1.0.0.1 D
Furthermore, AMD chipset drivers version was 4.08.09.2337.
That combo was rushed, and left performance on the table.

Fast forward a few weeks, the latest AGESA for Zen 4 is combo AM5 1.0.0.4, with 1.0.0.3A bringing a major performance jump. There have been at least 3 major AGESA updates since launch day.
Chipset drivers are now 4.11.15.342, 2 newer releases since, with the one in October bringing a major upgrade in power plans and core affinity specifically for AM5.
The performance for Zen 4 is now much more consistent, higher boosts on peak loads, higher clocks on sustained loads.

At launch, even after assuming that the reviewers updated the BIOS and installed chipsets drivers to the latest available, Zen 4 back then wasn't what it is today.
You remember some reviews posted fairly recently by HWUB, TechSpot and Jarrods Tech that show Zen 4 on top?
Yes, those reviews maligned by the fanboys of your team because they show team red now on top.

Grab those newer reviews, analyze the ABSOLUTE numbers for RPL, meaning the fps, not the relative number vs Zen4.
Compare the RPL numbers to any other review of your liking with comparable hardware. Are the numbers different?
They are not, if anything, their RPL numbers are better than other places, so they are not painting RPL worse light.
RPL is losing now because Zen 4 got much better.

Using Zen 4 launch day numbers is disingenuous at best, slimy at worst.
If you are looking for truth, you'll accept the fact that Zen 4 is getting better and better.
If you want, however, to prove that your team is the best, you don't need to see any data, you already have made up your mind, and will try to choose anything that validates your point.

So, what are you, disingenuous or slimy?
Same goes for your buddy @Carfax83
I have asked him to come and show how those reviews that showed Zen 4 on top handicapped RPL performance.
He has not shown it, and he won't because those reviews show RPL performing as it should in absolute numbers.
In the relative numbers vs the competition RPL looks worse now because the competition has refined its performance.

You make a lot of claims, but the onus is on you to prove that Zen 4 performance right now is better than Raptor Lake, and that any difference in performance can be explained by BIOS, firmware and chipset driver differences.

The reason why Carfax83 doesn't trust HWUB is, among many reasons, they don't use Windows 11 22H2 in their most recent comparisons, when it is known that 22H2 brings optimisations for Thread Director on Raptor Lake.

If you can't respond without making silly ad-hominem remarks about me or other posters, then it is really your problem.

 

[lopri]

I don't mind performance but there are just too many weird stuff going on here. 355W TDP but just two 6-pin connectors? Those plus mobo PCIE slot provide max 375W. That's awfully cutting it close. 384-bit, more than twice the transistors, yet they do worse as the resolution goes up.. And that 2D power consumption, wow, what is happening?

7nm -> 5nm is a huge jump; just ask AMD's CPU division. Yet these GPUs are not clocking like they should. Something is wrong with either the design or the execution. I suspect Infinity Fabric is the culprit, but of course I have no proof.

 

[lopri]

So far it seems this generation will be defined by the 4090 at the top and nothing below it makes any sense until you get to around half it's price, so $7-800 area. Nothing above $800 would get me to bite unless it's almost as fast as the 4090, which it won't be. The 4080 and both 7900 cards are duds.

You read my mind. I will be holding on to 3060 Ti or jump ship to A770.

 

[Ranulf]

6750XT also has great deals right now!

That is all that seems to be left in stock. Its an ok price but not worth the extra cost over the 6700xt. The $530 6800XT make them look weak overall price/perf I think.

 

[Kocicak]

Zen 4 is the fastest.
....
At launch, even after assuming that the reviewers updated the BIOS and installed chipsets drivers to the latest available, Zen 4 back then wasn't what it is today.
....
Using Zen 4 launch day numbers is disingenuous at best, slimy at worst.

You seem to be completely out of reality. If AMD managed to significantly improve the CPU performance by AGESA and driver updates, it would be major news, because something like that almost never happens. Everybody would then happily redo the tests.

Reviews use launch day numbers, because that is how reviews work.

The only slimy mollusc here is you.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

This is a tech forum. Everyone needs to calm down and stop with the personal attacks. Attack the argument, not the person making it.

I am saying this as a member since I posted here. But it will be referred for action if it doesn't get squashed now.

 

[lightmanek]

Are you going to defend HWUB for using a 5800X3D for the review, knowing it is going to CPU bottleneck the GPUs, especially the Nvidia cards? The 5800X3D isn't even in the top 5 fastest CPUs for gaming anymore, so why use that option unless you want to intentionally provoke CPU bottlenecks?

Are you going to defend HWUB for using "high" settings on Far Cry 6 and Cyberpunk 2077 in a GPU review when the settings go up to ultra? No idea what was going through their heads with this one. Maybe he wants to make RDNA3 look better than it really is by reducing GPU dependence?

What are the excuses this time? I honestly don't even know why I bother. HWUB always has so many glaring issues yet many on this forum continue to act as though they walk on water.

Yes, they stated many times that they are not changing CPU for 13900K to keep the accumulated data consistent and wait for Zen4 3D Cache, if you watched their videos you should know. If you like it or not, it's not your decision, but you can stop watching them if you hate it.
How about GN using 12700K, is that wrong in your eyes too?
How about TPU using 5800X on AMD side when they could easily use 7950X?

Why creating drama where there is none? They clearly state game/resolution/setting and platform used for testing, what else do you need? Are you looking for tests using only Ultra settings and 4K or 8K with overclocked 13900K and over 7000MHz memory? If that's the case then limit your reading/watching to content providing that and not 'demand' everyone follows suite as this would become boring after reading 2 reviews. Sorry, I do not see your bashing HWUB as valid as I appreciate wide spectrum of data points.
It would be a different matter if they manipulated results in malicious way, but all their numbers are fully reproducible.

 

[Timorous]

After looking at more reviews one thing is clear and that is the numbers are all over the place. Some games work as expected and others just fall of a cliff with barely any gain at all over the 6950XT.

I expect going forward there will be driver updates to make improvements and there will be a bit of a fine wine effect.

I was considering buying one of these GPUs early next year but now I am not so sure. I wIll have to wait and see how drivers mature and what kind of tweaking can be done. I would consider NV but my setup will have 2 OLED TVs for screens and they don't have (or I have not seen at least) cards with 2x HDMI 2.1 outs where as quite a few of the AMD AIBs have replaced the USB-C port with a 2nd HDMI 2.1 output which is ideal for what my setup will have.

Yes, they stated many times that they are not changing CPU for 13900K to keep the accumulated data consistent and wait for Zen4 3D Cache, if you watched their videos you should know. If you like it or not, it's not your decision, but you can stop watching them if you don't like.
How about GN using 12700K, is that wrong in your eyes too?
How about TPU using 5800X on AMD side when they could easily use 7950X?

Why creating drama where there is none? They clearly state game/resolution/setting and platform used for testing, what else do you need? Are you looking for tests using only Ultra settings and 4K or 8K with overclocked 13900K and over 7000MHz memory? If that's the case then limit your reading/watching to content providing that and not 'demand' everyone follows suite as this would become boring after reading 2 reviews. Sorry, I do not see your bashing HWUB as valid as I appreciate wide spectrum of data points.
It would be a different matter if they manipulated results in malicious way, but all their numbers are fully reproducible.

TPU upgraded to a 13900K for the 7900XT and XTX reviews. It is why the selection of cards is smaller than their prior reviews.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Yes, they stated many times that they are not changing CPU for 13900K to keep the accumulated data consistent and wait for Zen4 3D Cache, if you watched their videos you should know. If you like it or not, it's not your decision, but you can stop watching them if you hate it.
How about GN using 12700K, is that wrong in your eyes too?
How about TPU using 5800X on AMD side when they could easily use 7950X?

Why creating drama where there is none? They clearly state game/resolution/setting and platform used for testing, what else do you need? Are you looking for tests using only Ultra settings and 4K or 8K with overclocked 13900K and over 7000MHz memory? If that's the case then limit your reading/watching to content providing that and not 'demand' everyone follows suite as this would become boring after reading 2 reviews. Sorry, I do not see your bashing HWUB as valid as I appreciate wide spectrum of data points.
It would be a different matter if they manipulated results in malicious way, but all their numbers are fully reproducible.

Shooting the messenger is one of the weakest of all debating tactics.

I am not a big fan of the old school testing methodology as scientifically sound as it is. But I certainly understand it, especially from a business perspective. Have to get the content out pronto to pay the bills.

One of my issues with Aussie Steve is he cops out on things he shouldn't. For example: He is testing with the 5800X 3D but doesn't test Microsoft Flight Sim. He uses the same excuse Jarred from Tom's does about the account issue that MS nerfs. My contention is this: Steve is making that Youtube money and has patrons. Take the time to make a new MS account, sign up for game pass, and start playing MSFS again. Given that the 3D out performs every other CPU in this title, it would be illuminating to see how the fastest GPUs i.e. the 4090 and 7900XTX are, since the game is so CPU bound. Perhaps performance margins wouldn't change at all, but it would be good to have it confirmed.

I surmise the real reason he stopped instead of working around the issue, is that it is time consuming and boring to load and fly the same run over and over. I understand, perhaps even sympathize to an extent, but I want them numbers!

However, none of that invalidates his results. He is also good about owning his mistakes and updating the information when they do occur. Plus he has AMD, Nvidia, and Intel lovers all accuse him of bias against their preferred brand. When everyone is mad at you over your testing, you are doing something right.

Some of these big reviewers check numbers with each other before going live to ensure they didn't goof up, and discuss any issues. That's a good thing too. I think the reviews of the new AMD GPUs are all on point. The fact the GPUs are not more impressive is AMD's fault, as others have opined about in this thread. They never have the drivers completely solid at launch when releasing a new generation.

 

[amenx]

Still on the fence with the XTX. But much prefer to wait until the card is in wider circulation and see lots of 1st hand user reports, under-volting feedback, AIB cards, etc. Standout things that bug me are the high power draw with multi-monitors and video playback (as in TPU review). If its resolved with driver updates and Nvidia doesnt reduce 4080 to $999, I may very likely get the XTX.

 

[Tup3x]

It looks like XTX doesn't have any price advantage compared to 4080 here in Finland.

 

[linkgoron]

So far it seems this generation will be defined by the 4090 at the top and nothing below it makes any sense until you get to around half it's price, so $7-800 area. Nothing above $800 would get me to bite unless it's almost as fast as the 4090, which it won't be. The 4080 and both 7900 cards are duds.

I'm not saying that any card is a deal, but saying that adding 60% more money for 20% more performance is such a great deal then just get a 4090, because nothing AMD does would really make you buy an AMD card - except flagship performance, and even then you'd probably buy Nvidia. You want Nvidia, and that's fine, but saying that the 7900xtx that provides 80% of the 4090 only makes sense at 50% of the price is non-sensical. According to TPU it's not even that much slower with RTX vs the 4080 (pretty much same perf/$ vs the 4080 in RTX).

In the current market, the 7900XTX is priced fine. Against the 4090, for 62% of the money, you get 80% raster performance at 4K, and 64% RT performance at 4k. VS the 4080 you get essentially the same raster performance, maybe a hair higher, for 83% of the price and 86% of the RT performance performance in 4k RT.

7900XT should have been priced $100 lower, though.

New Vega is here. Raja would e proud.

It's not that bad, but it's clear that AMD bit more than it could chew with the new arc and node shrink. Hopefully drivers will improve the situation, and maybe there will really be a respin. A respin "fix" won't be enough for AMD to beat the 4090, or the 4090TI, but they could do a way better showing.

 

[Shamrock]

According to Linus Tech Tips, they only had a few days to test, because AMD didn't have a driver.

 

[Hans Gruber]

Linus said (17minute mark) in his youtube review. The day of the $600 top of the line graphics cards are a thing of the past. So we should envy the 1080ti owners and cry about the future? Crypto is done. Neither AMD nor Nvidia received the memo. Keep track of my posts. We will revisit this topic sometime around May/June 2023.

Anybody who wants to make predictions on the price of the 7900xt and 7900xtx in 6 months. Write your predictions. You may want to include the 4080 as well. I think the 7900xt will be $450-500 and the 7900xtx will be $599-650. I think the 4080 will be $700-750 in June 2023.

Unless AMD and Nvidia are either cooking the books or have written down the costs of these cards. Realistic pricing will have to return to the 10 series levels of Nvidia.

 

[maddie]

After looking at more reviews one thing is clear and that is the numbers are all over the place. Some games work as expected and others just fall of a cliff with barely any gain at all over the 6950XT.

I expect going forward there will be driver updates to make improvements and there will be a bit of a fine wine effect.

I was considering buying one of these GPUs early next year but now I am not so sure. I wIll have to wait and see how drivers mature and what kind of tweaking can be done. I would consider NV but my setup will have 2 OLED TVs for screens and they don't have (or I have not seen at least) cards with 2x HDMI 2.1 outs where as quite a few of the AMD AIBs have replaced the USB-C port with a 2nd HDMI 2.1 output which is ideal for what my setup will have.



TPU upgraded to a 13900K for the 7900XT and XTX reviews. It is why the selection of cards is smaller than their prior reviews.

This was posted before, but anyone looking at it will see a busted architecture, or at least one where some parts are being used intermittently. Look at that voltage spread for the same frequency.

We have basically (2) V/F curves, with a .1V difference @ iso F, or a 300MHz difference @ iso V. I think some parts of the pipeline are being used at times, or work-arounds to the flaws are taxing other parts heavily. We also see a tendency ( darker portion) to have the higher F being realized more often. This upper line would be closer to their design goals, I think.

 

[Carfax83]

You are at it again?
TPU used 2 different CPUs, a REGULAR 5800X and a i9-13900k
They are virtually tied at 4k. So how is that "CPU bottleneck"

They also tested other resolutions and they are definitely not tied due to the 7900 XTX having much more headroom with the 13900K.

Seems like a lot of duplication of effort if you ask me for nothing.

 

[Carfax83]

Link them
Make sure you pick the right Call of Duty.
Remember, Call of Duty Modern Warfare II, the new one.
COD:MW II

Radeon RX 7900 XT(X) im Test: Benchmarks (pcgameshardware.de)
AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT & 7900 XTX Review | Page 11 of 27 | eTeknix
AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX and XT review: Stellar performance and value | PCWorld

 

[Carfax83]

Don't do that. No one cares and it makes you look stupid.

Sorry, can't take you seriously if you conveniently ignore that he implied we were trolls and lurkers given how long myself and @amenx have been on these forums.

 

[Carfax83]

A majority of reviewers used Zen 4 CPUs because Zen 4 is the fastest gaming CPU
Like it or not, Zen 4 is the fastest gaming CPU, end of story.

You have a fantastical view of the World where AMD is on top, but the real World beckons you back to reality.

 

[coercitiv]

This was posted before, but anyone looking at it will see a busted architecture, or at least one where some parts are being used intermittently. Look at that voltage spread for the same frequency.

It's worth noting that RDNA2 also exhibits high voltage spread for the same frequency, albeit with a much cleaner distribution.

Spoiler: 6900XT

Spoiler: 6800XT