in Industry

Competition Works: AMD RX 7800 XT/ RX 7700 XT Review vs RTX 4070/ RTX 4060 Ti Review

1.7k Views 43 Comments



Nvidia cutting prices to better compete? The new AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT and 7700 XT show some impressive stuff from the new Navi 32 silicon… and the 7800 XT is competitively priced too. Rich has the lowdown on AMD’s impressive specs and performance, but is it enough to counter Nvidia’s cutting-edge new technologies?

Subscribe for more Digital Foundry:

Join the DF Patreon to support the team more directly and to get access to everything we do via pristine quality downloads: https://bit.ly/3jEGjvx

Want some DF-branded tee-shirts, mugs, hoodies or pullovers? Check out our store: https://bit.ly/2BqRTt0

For commercial enquiries, please contact business@digitalfoundry.net

00:00 Introduction
00:19 AMD’s Golden Opportunity
01:55 RX 7700 XT Pricing Doesn’t Make Sense
02:20 RX 7700 XT/ 7800 XT Tech Specs
03:15 Reference 7800 XT, Sapphire Pulse 7700 XT
03:54 Power Efficiency vs RTX 4070/ 4060 Ti
06:03 Rasterisation Performance
10:14 Ray Tracing Performance
13:52 Can DLSS Features Command A Price Premium?
17:46 Is AMD’s Pricing on 7800 XT Too Good To Ignore?
18:48 And Now, The Conclusion

Share this:

43 Comments

  2. my issue with AMD is many cards ive had dating all the way back to 2004-2006. the X1900 amd is i have always had some kind of overheatin gissues, driver issues or they just literally crap out after 6-12 months of heavy use. I havent experienced fast degrading with Nvidea, especially the ASUS Nvidea cards. IM having similar issues now in 2023 with an AMD card im running in the 6000 series line up. Weird anomolies in games, Driver issues, graphics crashes. I dont seem to go through as many headaches with Nvidea. But then maybe………..its the old saying, you GET what you pay for. AMD might be slightly faster, but is it as reliable as Nvidea? Like the GTX 1070………and GTX 1080 are still ok cards even today. Without ray tracing.

  4. Now I'm just missing a part in the video about Workstation performance. I'm looking into the 7800xt and 4070 for my current pc as a hybrid between gaming and being able to do 3d design & I can't find any good comparison for that.

  5. I think that it comes down to the price, which can very depending where you live. Here in Australia a 4070 and 7800 XT are pretty much the same price, although the 7800 XT is a little cheaper, but in America the 7800 XT is a $100 US cheaper than the 4070, which is a significant amount of money. I would say that if you can get it cheaper, then going for the 7800 XT is a no-brainer, but if you're looking at paying the same for either card, then this just becomes a harder decision to make. For pretty much the same arguments you're making: that owning either card has become a significantly different experience; making apples to apples comparisons harder.

    I personally went for the 4070.

  7. You clown, where is the rest of the work for the 7800 card with video editing at the time of extraction? How long does it take to extract a 4K video? What is the temperature?

    Isn't it just that I use the card to play?

  8. AMD's drivers have been… not so great. Much higher power usage also generally means hotter temps and a shorter lifespan. Between that and not having DLSS, I just gotta hope Nvidia finally stops screwing up with the 50 series… Sticking to my 1070 for yet another generation.

  9. I have rtx 2070 super and processor is 3700x . Is it worth it to upgrade just gpu to let's say 4070. My main goal is to play alan wake 2 with ok ray tracing and hopefully 60fps. I know 2070 super is not enough but is gpu upgrade enough? I might play it on ps5 or series x but don't know yet does it have 60fps mode. All in all 60fps would be enough for console (rather play on tv) but if is possible to get good enough visuals on pc then I'll buy it for that.

  11. Rich is the man, best GPU reviewer in the business for my money. 7800xt vs 4070 is, for my money, the most interesting comparison between AMD and Nvidia cards this gen. For (most) of the low to midrange I think AMD is very obviously where you'd wanna go (not the 7600, though. RDNA2 cards like the 6700xt represent the best value in the ~300 dollar range), and for the high end I think you'd be crazy not to choose Nvidia. The true midrange to mid-high is where the comparisons are most interesting. The 4070ti SHOULD be an obvious win over the 7900xt but I simply would not pay that much more for a 12gb card, so the extra 8gb and better raster performance AMD is offering make it a level playing field.

  12. The amount of cherry picking in DFs reviews are absolutely insane, and at the end it almost sounds like an nvidia defense speech… For those looking for unbiased reviews go to an unbiased outlet like Gamer's Nexus or Hardware Unboxed… DF is really only relevant if you have become an nvidia fanboy by consuming their content these last couple of years, or you truly value RT, nvidia-specific games or RT tech demos above anything else (and CUDA for professional workloads of course). But if you are an average gamer with typical workloads of both rasterized performance and some RT. AMD is honestly MUCH better than what DF is making them out to be. There's a reason why they use "Control" and "Cyberpunk" as test cases, because these two games have been HEAVILY optimized for nvidia architecture, and they will make AMD look worse than they actually are (I mean how relevant is "Control" in the gaming landscape today? why are they still pushing this legacy RT title?). Looking at modern RT implementations. Like Ratchet & Clank, Spiderman, RE4, Guardians of the Galaxy, F1 etc. the AMD cards perform really well with RT. If you benchmark hardware agnostic RT workloads, a card like the 6600XT has VERY similar RT performance to a RTX3060. Which is really not the sentiment you get from DF. Be aware, be critical, look at a variety of unbiased outlets and choose the GPU that makes most sense for your workloads and budget.

    Also, who in their right mind would choose 1440p DLSS/FSR "Performance" instead of "Quality" on a 7800XT? (I would even choose 4K FSR/DLSS Quality with that amount of power) It's just a way to make FSR look far worse than it is (as its inherent flaws is exaggerated at lower base resolutions) Also, why are DF so focused on nvidia featuresets? they haven't even commented on AMDs software and featureset in an AMD review…. It makes DF nvidia-biased. And they have extremely close professional relationship with nvidia, which shouldn't be trusted by you as a consumer…

    Don't get me wrong, I like the features that nvidia offers, I have owned many of their cards since the 90's. But I value unbiased reviews for consumers A LOT more.

  13. I just think the 5$ supporter gets seriously burned in all of this. I’ve had extended stays as a supporter at the 5$ tier and never received anything advertised, simply the downloads which are of little value…it honestly sucks. I want to support but not get burned by not being able to shell out 15$ a month…

  14. rx6000 Amd was better on consumption/efficiency and performance/price … rx7000 Amd consume more than Nvidia but price/performance is always better … AMD wins for me ! rx6000 was clearly the best GPUs from AMD, rx7000 is good but only if we don't have a rx6000 gpu …

  15. The conclusion here is that all these cards are not good enough for the price. Ray tracing performance is not good enough on any GPU. Raster performance was already decent on 2019-2020 GPUs so why bother upgrading at all?

  17. the problem is that nGreedia is not making DLSS an open source which they can if they want, but that's why we have FSR 3 and have the guts to compare them when FSR 3 is out. 😉

  18. This is the point I have tried to make many times that falls on deaf ears. Yes the 7800 xt is very impressive price to performance but for one I prefer ray tracing and for 2 games are starting to use upscaling as a soft requirement to be playable these days and with this being a fact having dlss instead of fsr will give you a massively better experience when playing any game, even those that amd sponsor to try and force it out you can see someone can simply mod it into the game in a single day.

    Talking about going forward from 2023 in a year where about 80% of games have had devs say "you need to use upscaling to achieve good frame rates" the 50 dollar price difference and slightly better rasta is not worth it for me compared to having better RT performance and dlss.

  21. Pish. They're not worried, the same way they weren't worried when 3dFx launched the Voodoo5 6000 to try and compete with the GeForce256.

    Raw pixel fillrate was a dead end versus hardware geometry transform and lighting, and raw rasterization performance is also a dead end 20 years later when we're already reaching the limit of perceptible differences in triangle pushing performance. Ray tracing is the next quantum leap and AMD's GPU business will die if they don't pull up their socks. It'll be bad for all of us.

  26. As a hold out on the GTX 1060, the AMD option does look good to me. I've played through TLoU 1 using FSR 2 and found it a surprisingly good experience all things considered. I'm glad raytracing is happening in games but it does look like it needs a few more years before it can be taken seriously as an option as i think we need more headroom in GPU performance than exists currently.

  27. I think DF is the b3st channel to actually do the DLSS balanced vs FSR quality comparison. Because that is the tricky part also the fram3time stutters for 16GB v 12 GB. Its a tough decision for those looking to upgrade at 450 -650 usd price point

  29. most games releasing today don't have upscaling even implemented, and until thats industry standard I think its fair for reviews to focus on rasterization for now.

  31. All of them are overpriced and will continue to be while its impossible for a new company to try their luck, so no. Competition doesnt work. Its fucking over the customers and leaving the workers under the bus, in the dust.

  32. I'm a noticed whennit comes to AMD an Nvidia. I'm running 4070 an a Ryzen 5800X3D. I LOVE DLSS I can't see giving that up for FSR. regardless of AMD cards looking like a much better value. And DLSS 3.5 with frame gen! I frickin love this feature!

  33. Have a 4070Ti in my main Windows PC and as of a couple of days ago a 7800XT in my SteamOS console PC. Both cards are definitely beasts for my needs, and with an AMD card kind of being the sole "plug and play" option for Linux w/o fighting with different driver revisions depending on the game, the 7800XT was the best choice in my case for my Xbox/PS replacement console PC gaming setup.

  36. Weird that these new graphics cards struggle to remain 60fps at 1440p Raytracing, & even dropping into the 40's/30's. Not saying the consoles are more powerful, but even the PS5 can do 4k raytracing capped 40fps.

  37. 7800XT has 4 compute units missing
    And the 7900XT is cut down

    They can make a bigger one
    Its cut down biiiig time

    It should have (The next RAGE FURY ) 32GB vram and 128 compute units…. lets call it 120 compute units with 8 reserved for high priority workloads

    The 7800XT also has 4missing compute units….
    Whats up with this?
    Maybe this is why we have a strong 4090ti because radeon supposed to be going waaaay bigger

    Wat thi fcuuk at the powerdraw

    Maybe thats why, they got a load of poor quality chips

  38. We need graphics settings options on android games because if we want more battery power
    We can lock the game at 30fps and lower shadows and other shit tht dont really matter too much

  41. Nothing that compares to DLSS and woeful RT and it costs more to run the card than the equivalent Nvidia card. FSR 3 is all software based too so i can't see how that's going to provide a more stable image than intel or Nvidia. If i was only running games that were pre RT & DLSS maybe i'd consider AMD.
    rasterization performance doesn't cut it any longer especially when you can take a card with less memory and have it run at double or triple the framerate WITH full RT and using less power just by pressing the magic DLSS button or dropping DLSS into games like starfield.
    And thats before you bring codecs for any sort of media server or rendering pipeline. I don't know who these cards are for. I want AMD to compete so that Nvidia can't get away with doing what they do with the cost but they are so far ahead of AMD it's crazy

  42. The thing I think gets overlooked is what the absolute performance is rather than relative performance. AMD's rasterisation advantage is often presented like it has equivalence with Nvidia's ray tracing advantage, but I don't think it does. Given ray tracing is almost always your heaviest workload, unless you're not interested in RT at all, it's where the performance advantage matters the most. It's like how you should pay attention to the 1% lows as much as if not more than the averages when looking at benchmarks. If one card has a 50% advantage in rasterisation and one has a 50% advantage in ray tracing, that might seem like a wash, but it matters whether that advantage is taking you from 100fps to 150fps or from 40fps to 60fps. I'd take the 100fps/60fps card over the 150fps/40fps card, even if the 100fps v 150fps scenario is more common. Of course I've invented some numbers there that don't reflect the actual differences between these cards, I just wanted to illustrate the general point.

  43. think the 4060ti gets waaaaaay too much slack. £369 gets you better raytracing performance than a £499 AMD card yet because its 20% slower at "rasterized" performance, everyone loses their mind? bizzare really.