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

 

[amenx]

Flawed bench. An easy game to run @ 4k yet he chose basic settings. Have feeling extreme settings may have given different result. Always something fishy about HUB.

 

[Carfax83]

Flawed bench. An easy game to run @ 4k yet he chose basic settings. Have feeling extreme settings may have given different result. Always something fishy about HUB.

Prepare to get down voted for saying that

But it's crap like that which made me unsubscribe from their YouTube channel and block it. Their overall testing methodology isn't bad, but some of their results and decisions range from questionable to outright nonsensical.

 

[Carfax83]

Reviews were right on par with most expectations it seems. Slightly faster than the RTX 4080 in rasterization, but at RTX 3090-3090 Ti performance when RT is enabled.

Seems like a solid card given the price point, and if FSR 3.0 has FG like what's been rumored, then it would be even better.

As always though, the AMD hype train starts off with a bang and ends with derailment.

 

[Hitman928]

Flawed bench. An easy game to run @ 4k yet he chose basic settings. Have feeling extreme settings may have given different result. Always something fishy about HUB.

View attachment 72760

They test multiplayer benches with reduced settings because many people play this way to maximize frame rates in competitive playing. Many of their viewers requested they test this way for multiplayer driven tests.

 

[Carfax83]

They test multiplayer benches with reduced settings because many people play this way to maximize frame rates in competitive playing. Many of their viewers requested they test this way for multiplayer driven tests.

This is a GPU review, not a game review. They can do that crap in a dedicated game performance test, which they have done in the past several times.

 

[Kaluan]

Flawed bench. An easy game to run @ 4k yet he chose basic settings. Have feeling extreme settings may have given different result. Always something fishy about HUB.

View attachment 72760

...says a troll and his lurker buddy who never played eSports/competitive games in their lives.

They literally had another poll last week asking if people prefer competitive games being benched at "competitive settings", max settings or max settings (including RT, were applicable). As expected, "competitive settings" won again.

But neah, it's probably a cOnSpIrAcy!!1 HUB is out to get Leather Jacket Guy and Gelsinger! 🤣

 

[Carfax83]

...says a troll and his lurker buddy who never played eSports/competitive games in their lives.

And your account is how old? If anyone is a troll and a lurker it's you.

They literally had another poll last week asking if people prefer competitive games being benched at "competitive settings", max settings or max settings (including RT, were applicable). As expected, "competitive settings" won again.

Could care less about some stupid poll. They can do what they've always done and review MP game performance separately from the "hardware" reviews.

 

[alexruiz]

Why is the 7900XTX beating the 4090 in COD:MWII?

COD:MW II loves Radeon.
Every reviewer got comparable results in this game.
Call of Duty games in general run better on Radeon.

When Modern Warfare II launched, the reviews had the RX 6700XT beating the RTX 3080 comfortably.
If anything, the gap has shrank recently. The 6800 is barely beating the 3080Ti.

 

[amenx]

...says a troll and his lurker buddy who never played eSports/competitive games in their lives.

They literally had another poll last week asking if people prefer competitive games being benched at "competitive settings", max settings or max settings (including RT, were applicable). As expected, "competitive settings" won again.

But neah, it's probably a cOnSpIrAcy!!1 HUB is out to get Leather Jacket Guy and Gelsinger! 🤣

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.

 

[maddogmcgee]

Cut HUB some slack. You know how easily a video card gets damaged when delivered overland in the pouch of a carrier kangaroo ?

Reviews of 7900xtx and 4090 make me long for a bitcoin resurgence. I want my video card investments to be profitable, not cost me thousands. Buying top end seems silly atm.

 

[Hans Gruber]

The power consumption of the 7 series cards is a bit off putting for me. The 7900xtx is much better than the 7900XT based on the reviews. I wonder if these can be undervolted for similar performance. FYI, the 3080 MSRP was $699. The computer market is down 10% but inflation lives on in the GPU market.

 

[lightmanek]

And your account is how old? If anyone is a troll and a lurker it's you.



Could care less about some stupid poll. They can do what they've always done and review MP game performance separately from the "hardware" reviews.

You might think your way of testing is the only 'right' way, but at least to me, having variety of settings and resolutions across different sites / YT channels gives better overlay picture of performance. Only looking at the results fitting your predisposition about certain hardware can be seen as bias or trolling, where discussing results in an open way can broaden understanding of strong and weak points of a given product.
I for one appreciate work HUB / GN / Paul / KitGuru / LTT / etc are putting into their launch reviews. It's a job for them, but it's not an easy one and they have to choose what and how to test to meet deadlines, so it's absolutely ureasonable to expect them to produce results for all the games and settings people want to see.

 

[alexruiz]

@Stuka87

Test beds of some of the videos I watched for reviews:

Paul's hardware:
Ryzen 9 7950X, Asus X670E ROG Crosshair hero, 32GB DDR5-6000 CL30 G-Skill Trident Z5, Corsair 360mm CLC, Corsair AXi 1600, windows 11 21H2
He might have the nicest hardware for his testbed

KitGuru
i9-12900k, MSI MAG Z690 Unified, 32GB DDR5 A-Data XPG Lancer

Hardware Canucks

Ryzen 7 7700X, Asus X670E ROG Crosshair hero, 32GB DDR5-6000, windows 11 21H2

Hardware unboxed
Ryzen 7 5800X3D, MSI MPG X570S Carbon Max WiFi, 32GB DDR4-3200 CL14 G-Skill Trident Z, Windows 11 21H2, Radeon adrenalin 22.11.2 WHQL for older AMD GPUs

Tech Testers

i9-13900K, ASUS ROG Maximus Z790 HERO, 32GB Corsair Vengeance RGB DDR5-6000, Corsair H150i Elite LCD, Seasonic Prime TX 1600 Watt, Windows 11 PRO 22H2

GamersNexus, LinusTechTips and JayZ2cents
Could not find test bed specs. If someone caught them, please share them

Subjective observation
The 7900 XTX seems to outperform the 4080 by larger margins on test beds using an i9-13900k
I need to go and rewatch the videos, but I remember tech testers had the 7900 XTX up by 5% at 4k vs the 4080
If I am wrong in my subjective observation, someone please correct me

 

[AnandThenMan]

This is exactly where I thought performance would be I'll be picking up the XTX when partner cards are available.

Cut HUB some slack. You know how easily a video card gets damaged when delivered overland in the pouch of a carrier kangaroo ?

Strongly disagree joey transport is safe for a kitten.

 

[In2Photos]

@Stuka87

Test beds of some of the videos I watched for reviews:

Paul's hardware:
Ryzen 9 7950X, Asus X670E ROG Crosshair hero, 32GB DDR5-6000 CL30 G-Skill Trident Z5, Corsair 360mm CLC, Corsair AXi 1600, windows 11 21H2
He might have the nicest hardware for his testbed

KitGuru
i9-12900k, MSI MAG Z690 Unified, 32GB DDR5 A-Data XPG Lancer

Hardware Canucks

Ryzen 7 7700X, Asus X670E ROG Crosshair hero, 32GB DDR5-6000, windows 11 21H2

Hardware unboxed
Ryzen 7 5800X3D, MSI MPG X570S Carbon Max WiFi, 32GB DDR4-3200 CL14 G-Skill Trident Z, Windows 11 21H2, Radeon adrenalin 22.11.2 WHQL for older AMD GPUs

Tech Testers

i9-13900K, ASUS ROG Maximus Z790 HERO, 32GB Corsair Vengeance RGB DDR5-6000, Corsair H150i Elite LCD, Seasonic Prime TX 1600 Watt, Windows 11 PRO 22H2

GamersNexus, LinusTechTips and JayZ2cents
Could not find test bed specs. If someone caught them, please share them

Subjective observation
The 7900 XTX seems to outperform the 4080 by larger margins on test beds using an i9-13900k
I need to go and rewatch the videos, but I remember tech testers had the 7900 XTX up by 5% at 4k vs the 4080
If I am wrong in my subjective observation, someone please correct me

Phil briefly mentioned that Jayz test bed was an overclocked 12900K, but no other details were provided. Around the 12:35 mark.

 

[Fallen Kell]

Yikes. I had tempered my expectations, but didn't think AMD would sail underneath them still. It definitely puts a damper on my original plan to get a 7900XTX at launch. Clearly there's an issue in the GCD and perhaps with the drivers as well (it should not be spending 100W idling for multi-monitors). It really does seem like AMD bit off more than they could chew here. I'll sit this out for a few months until some of this stuff is sorted and then reevaluate. I really do hope they get a respin out in 6 months rather than 12.

AMD's drivers ALWAYS suck at launch. Their drivers are usually 6-12 months behind their hardware releases, as it takes them that long to finally get their card optimizations in place for any new gen of card. This is one of the places where Nvidia really does shine in that their launch drivers are typically usable and only a few % of performance behind what you see later on in the release cycle. AMD's on the other hand typically see a 10% bump in performance along with stability finally occurring sometime 4-6 months later, and possibly a little more performance 12 months later....

 

[Carfax83]

You might think your way of testing is the only 'right' way, but at least to me, having variety of settings and resolutions across different sites / YT channels gives better overlay picture of performance. Only looking at the results fitting your predisposition about certain hardware can be seen as bias or trolling, where discussing results in an open way can broaden understanding of strong and weak points of a given product.
I for one appreciate work HUB / GN / Paul / KitGuru / LTT / etc are putting into their launch reviews. It's a job for them, but it's not an easy one and they have to choose what and how to test to meet deadlines, so it's absolutely ureasonable to expect them to produce results for all the games and settings people want to see.

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.

 

[Carfax83]

COD:MW II loves Radeon.
Every reviewer got comparable results in this game.
Call of Duty games in general run better on Radeon.

When Modern Warfare II launched, the reviews had the RX 6700XT beating the RTX 3080 comfortably.
If anything, the gap has shrank recently. The 6800 is barely beating the 3080Ti.

I googled for just 30 seconds and found two reviewers that contradicted these results for the RTX 4090.

Yes the engine favors AMD significantly, but increasing the settings can change the outcome.

 

[AnandThenMan]

AMD's drivers ALWAYS suck at launch. Their drivers are usually 6-12 months behind their hardware releases, as it takes them that long to finally get their card optimizations in place for any new gen of card. This is one of the places where Nvidia really does shine in that their launch drivers are typically usable and only a few % of performance behind what you see later on in the release cycle. AMD's on the other hand typically see a 10% bump in performance along with stability finally occurring sometime 4-6 months later, and possibly a little more performance 12 months later....

Nvidia drivers have their own issues. If I use the professional drivers then my Adobe applications are good but my games suck, if I go with the game driver then Adobe apps take a dump constantly.

 

[Carfax83]

The 7900 XTX seems to outperform the 4080 by larger margins on test beds using an i9-13900k

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?

 

[insertcarehere]

AMD's drivers ALWAYS suck at launch. Their drivers are usually 6-12 months behind their hardware releases, as it takes them that long to finally get their card optimizations in place for any new gen of card. This is one of the places where Nvidia really does shine in that their launch drivers are typically usable and only a few % of performance behind what you see later on in the release cycle. AMD's on the other hand typically see a 10% bump in performance along with stability finally occurring sometime 4-6 months later, and possibly a little more performance 12 months later....

This meme is really getting old, HWUB retested 6800xt vs RTX3080 10GB earlier this year... and the overall positions are basically identical to what they were at launch (6800xt by a bit in low resolutions, 3080 by a bit in high resolutions).

Buying an AMD card with expectation that performance improvements will change its competitive position down the line is likely to just disappoint.

 

[zinfamous]

The real benefit of fine wine is that you can go out now and buy a 16GB 6800XT that gives you 2/3rds of the performance of a $1200 4080 for $500 new or even less used.

...well, I just did that today but it cost me $604 (after tax; $560 was the card price), because "all I could find" was a Red Devil at Microcenter, restocked yesterday and promptly sold out after added I added to reserve (the Red Dragon that I ordered from Amazon 3 weeks ago ($545), and was supposed to be delivered yesterday, turned out not to actually exist...), and I need 3x DP ports anyway, so options are really limited in AIB cards that I can use, so, there it is. The Nitro doesn't really seem to exist anywhere these days. ....not for under $900, if those are actually real.

 

[alexruiz]

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.

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"

 

[alexruiz]

I googled for just 30 seconds and found two reviewers that contradicted these results for the RTX 4090.

Yes the engine favors AMD significantly, but increasing the settings can change the outcome.

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

 

[zinfamous]

Fair point. Perhaps I'm still salty over the sudden end to support for anything older than Polaris.


Edit: Its looking like the best deals this year will be the 6700xt or 6800xt.

6750XT also has great deals right now!