News AMD Announces Radeon RX 7800 XT at $499, RX 7700 XT at $449

[danielcoles1989]

I've corrected the prices to note that it's $599 and $399 (and sort of $499 with the 4060 Ti 16GB). But yeah, all of those are basically higher priced than what people want. And I have no doubt Nvidia is making money on all of them and could have gone lower.

It's basically the same story as much of the 40-series. Every 40-series card got bumped up a level in naming compared to where we'd normally expect it to land. RTX 4080 would have made more sense as a 4070 Ti, and then give us a "real" 4080 with 20GB and a 320-bit interface that's a toned-down AD102. Or call that the 4080 Ti maybe and give us a 4080 with 16GB that costs $999 or less.

Calling the RX 7800 XT with that name would (in the past) imply that it would be at least ~25% faster than an RX 6800 XT. But instead we're likely getting barely faster performance, for a lower launch price but a similar current street price. The 7700 XT has the right name, and maybe even the right performance... but 6700 XT was launched at a higher price than it warranted due to mining and shortages. It really should have been a $399 or $349 card (not that it would have sold for that in 2021 through 2022).

If you look at all the benchmarks of the previous generation, AMD is basically doing lateral moves and maybe a slight upgrade, but often at the places where smaller gaps existed.

7900 XTX is 10~20% faster than 7900 XT (CPU bottlenecks come into play)
7900 XT is 15~20% faster than 6950 XT (bigger gap)
6950 XT is 6~8% faster than 6900 XT
6900 XT is 5~7% faster than 6800 XT << 7800 XT lands here
6800 XT is 15~18% faster than 6800 (bigger gap)
6800 is 20~25% faster than 6750 XT (bigger gap) << 7700 XT lands here
6750 XT is 5~7% faster than 6700 XT
6700 XT is ~15% faster than 6700 10GB (slightly bigger gap)
6700 10GB is 10~15% faster than 6650 XT (slightly bigger gap)
6650 XT is ~5% faster than 6600 XT << 7600 lands here
6600 XT is 15~20% faster than 6600 (bigger gap)

Listing it this way, you can see that the 7900 XT and XTX at least justify their existence more. 7800 XT looks to be a very small improvement over the 6800 XT when you get right down to it. 7700 XT offers potentially bigger gains over the 6700 XT, but also pushes into higher pricing territory. 7600 only looks like a big upgrade if you compare against the vanilla 6600, but the price was higher than the going rate for 6650 XT.

Completely agree. Would even bring in the 3060 12GB v 4060 8GB, and 3060ti V 4060ti 8gb is a bit more of a sideways upgrade though. I feel outside of the top SKUs, this gen is treading water while silicon goes to H100 / MI300.

 

[Elusive Ruse]

The 7800XT launching at $500 makes me a happy camper. I'm doing a complete new build after 7 years, so the jump is gonna be huge. The 7800XT is a better 6800XT and launching at a lower price than a new 6800XT right now. I have nothing to complain about.

 

[mrv_co]

Unless you're in a true 'I need something right now' situation, it seems to me that the key for this generation of GPUs is avoiding a day1 purchase at the launch (formerly known as List or MSRP) price and waiting for street prices that better reflects actual value (whether you chose to buy a previous or current gen card).

 

[-Fran-]

I forgot to comment on the 7700XT itself... What the hell AMD? Did you not learn from the 7900XT?

Well, I guess it'll get a passing grade when it's around or under $400, because we all know that will happen.

Regards.

 

[baboma]

>Unless you're in a true 'I need something right now' situation, it seems to me that the key for this generation of GPUs is avoiding a day1 purchase at the launch (formerly known as List or MSRP) price and waiting for street prices that better reflects actual value (whether you chose to buy a previous or current gen card).

I disagree, also with Jarred's "tough sell" takeaway.

First, yours (and Jarred's) are the enthusiast's view, ie buying a GPU is largely a want, not a need. If the new cards isn't to your liking, you can afford to wait, or buy a better price/perf alternative.

Regular people buy a GPU when they need to, and they'll buy new regardless of price/perf. The reality is that there's no real alternative to AMD/Nvidia for GPUs. It's a duopoly. People didn't stop buying even during the height of the crypto craze when scalper pricing reigned supreme.

The question then is just how large a group are the DIY desktop PC enthusiasts compared to the rest gaming PC market, and I doubt it's large enough to matter. Sure, we're the influencers for the regular buyers, and our opinion have some sway. But at the end of the day, people will buy the best they can get at the time, and they'll move on with their lives, not sitting around kvetching about the "good old days."

I disagree, as I doubt pricing will drop substantially because of thumbs-down from enthusiasts. Both Nvidia & AMD are on the record in stating that they'll undership to manage inventory and counteract reduced demand. At least for Nvidia GPUs, pricing has been remarkably stable for the 3000 series. AMD cards have had more movement for the 6000 series, but I think AMD has learned from Nvid, and 7000 pricing will likely be as stable.

Whatever pricing the new gaming GPUs come to, I doubt the companies care, given the burgeoning AI market where profits are much larger. In fact, they may well be happy to have reduced demand from the gaming PC market, so they can devote that much more resources to producing more AI wares. I think reducing price to stimulate demand is the last thing they would do. If they had wanted more demand, they would have put out cards with better price/perf in the first place.

One metric to gauge how much sway enthusiasts have over the PC market is to monitor changes to the monthly Steam survey. Already we can see that enthusiasts' opinion don't really matter, as they by and large favor AMD for better price/perf, whereas Nvidia cards dominate the survey. I don't see this changing for this gen.

 

[Matt_ogu812]

After reading through these comments this reminds me of the same 'hide & seek' games that are played by AMD & Nvidia when shopping for a vehicle and or a cell phone.
Think I'll go back to my Atari and wait until the dust settles as to which GPU to buy with my next PC build.

 

[Matt_ogu812]

I've been waiting a long time for an upgrade and the 7800 XT looks tempting. I was really hoping it would be nearer the $450 price range though. Seems AMD doesn't want a home run this generation.

I think AMD is waiting for NVIDIA to give them permission to take the lead........😉

 

[baboma]

>Think I'll go back to my Atari and wait until the dust settles as to which GPU to buy with my next PC build.

When best to buy PC parts hasn't changed. It's Black Friday and the weeks after when the best deals of the year are found. What to buy hasn't changed either. It's whatever that gives you best bang-per-buck at that time.

All this grumbling may seem confusing, but ultimately it's only about people jabbering about their hobby, and is mostly for its own sake--griping because it's what people are prone to do. It's only obfuscation. If you steer clear of the smoke, the choices aren't different than any of the previous time you buy.

 

[Mattzun]

7800XT for $500 seems like a decent value for someone looking for a card that is good at 1440p for 2-3 years.
I don't see a big upgrade market - its pretty much the same as the 6800xt you have been able to get for a year at around that price. I can see it becoming the new recommendation for the $400-600 price point for people who need a new card for some reason.

7700XT seems like they don't really want anyone to buy it. I'm assuming that most of the chips are good enough to build 7800s.
If they are producing as many 7700's as 7800's, I see a repeat of the 7900XT price drops where the card is frequently available at $400 or less

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

I disagree, also with Jarred's "tough sell" takeaway.

The signs are all there and show that people aren't buying the latest generation as fast as they have in times past. That's especially true of AMD, but the RTX 40-series sales aren't massive. They're probably not much worse than in times past, but the 30-series was sold out continually for different reasons (and many of those cards never made the Steam survey).

If someone needs a new graphics card, the question of whether the RX 7000-series and RTX 40-series is better than the previous generation comes into play. And yes, they are... barely in a lot of cases. So maybe that's good enough. But there are also a lot of used graphics cards, at some very good prices. If your current GPU is so old that it died, so that you "need" a new GPU, eBay GPUs are definitely an option.

More likely, though, you'll buy a mainstream GPU to replace your eight years old mainstream GPU. Which, again, means $450 and $500 GPUs are going to be a tough sell. People that "need" a new graphics card and haven't upgrade in a long time aren't enthusiasts, and they don't generally buy cards that are even high-end or mainstream-high-end. They buy budget or budget-mainstream.

So: RTX 4060 or RX 7600 get the sale. That's what I mean by these sorts of GPUs and prices being a tough sell. The people in the market for a $500 graphics card will generally be closer to the enthusiast end of the spectrum and will thus behave like enthusiasts.

 

[Lucky_SLS]

Why is FSR3 not mentioned in the title? I thought Tom's would be doing a separate article on it.

Kinda seems like you guys are downplaying FSR3...

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

Why is FSR3 not mentioned in the title? I thought Tom's would be doing a separate article on it.

Kinda seems like you guys are downplaying FSR3...

I've been downplaying DLSS 3 Frame Generation for quite some time now. I strongly suspect FSR3's equivalent (Fluid Motion Frames technology) won't be any better, and in some cases will be clearly worse. It will be at least somewhat interesting, but for this announcement, the new GPUs are clearly the headlining topic. And we can't have huge headlines, or things look screwy. 🤷‍♂️

I'll definitely look into FSR3 more when we can actually test it in person. Right now, it's just AMD talking and saying it works and looks great, but the first games to support FSR3 are "coming this fall" (meaning at least a month away).

Also, if you're doing 4K with Performance upscaling plus frame generation, you're actually rendering 1/8 of the pixels and then interpolating the rest. Which means if a game like Forspoken goes from 36 to 122 fps, that's a 3.39x improvement rather than 8x. Obviously there's overhead, but I'm waiting to test and FSR3 game and see what the following look like:

1) Native rendering
2) Native plus framegen
3) Quality upscale (2x)
4) Quality upscale plus framegen
5) Performance upscale (4x)
6) Performance upscale plus framegen

Right now, AMD has shown performance for 1 and 6, the extremes of that list. I know from past experience that FSR2 Performance upscaling tends to look very soft compared to native rendering, and it's only "comparable" in games where the TAA is poor and there's no sharpening filter.

 

[Avro Arrow]

EDIT: Jared rightfully pointed out that I had made a mistake and I thank him for that (I don't want to post incorrect things). The media that I saw showed it up against the RTX 4070 but I thought that it was the 4070 Ti. The RX 7800 XT won't be a great value and the RX 7700 XT will be even worse.

AMD shot themselves in the foot again. If nVidia's value preposition wasn't the worst that it has ever been, nobody would be buying these. The thing is, nVidia has so many blind followers that they can get away with ripping people off while AMD can't. AMD made this same mistake in 2003 with the Athlon64. AMD charged more for it than ANY Intel CPU at the time and because of this, they failed to gain what was really important, marketshare and mindshare. They were so focused on short-term profits that they screwed themselves royally.

Fast-forward seventeen years and AMD did something unprecedented. Never in the battle between AMD and Intel had either side completely dominated the other in every single category. Intel often had better power efficiency with superior single-core and gaming performance while AMD had better multi-thread performance and better value for dollar. When Zen3 was released, AMD had superior efficiency, better value and faster single-thread, multi-thread and gaming performance. For the first time, one of the two companies ran the table with the other. Did AMD skyrocket their prices like they did with Athlon64? No, they didn't and as a result, we're in a situation where the TPU survey shows that about 70% of their user base has a Ryzen CPU. Ten years ago, it probably would've been 80-20% in favour of Intel.

It's not exactly rocket-science. AMD just has to do with Radeon what they did with Ryzen.

 

[Avro Arrow]

I've been downplaying DLSS 3 Frame Generation for quite some time now. I strongly suspect FSR3's equivalent (Fluid Motion Frames technology) won't be any better, and in some cases will be clearly worse. It will be at least somewhat interesting, but for this announcement, the new GPUs are clearly the headlining topic. And we can't have huge headlines, or things look screwy. 🤷‍♂️

I'll definitely look into FSR3 more when we can actually test it in person. Right now, it's just AMD talking and saying it works and looks great, but the first games to support FSR3 are "coming this fall" (meaning at least a month away).

Also, if you're doing 4K with Performance upscaling plus frame generation, you're actually rendering 1/8 of the pixels and then interpolating the rest. Which means if a game like Forspoken goes from 36 to 122 fps, that's a 3.39x improvement rather than 8x. Obviously there's overhead, but I'm waiting to test and FSR3 game and see what the following look like:

1) Native rendering
2) Native plus framegen
3) Quality upscale (2x)
4) Quality upscale plus framegen
5) Performance upscale (4x)
6) Performance upscale plus framegen

Right now, AMD has shown performance for 1 and 6, the extremes of that list. I know from past experience that FSR2 Performance upscaling tends to look very soft compared to native rendering, and it's only "comparable" in games where the TAA is poor and there's no sharpening filter.

I wouldn't really worry too much about it Jared. Frame generation is nothing more than a gimmick and I don't see how AMD's version of it will be any different. At best, DLSS frame-generation is a situational solution but at best, you need to have ~60FPS to begin with which kinda defeats the purpose of frame generation to begin with.

The poster child for DLSS frame-generation is FS2020 which is pretty ironic since, as a flight simulator, even 30FPS is perfectly fine because you're looking at the sky and there's no sudden high-speed movements to track. This was how Microsoft themselves talked about it when it first came out.

So what's the point of frame generation in a game like that?

 

[Lucky_SLS]

I've been downplaying DLSS 3 Frame Generation for quite some time now. I strongly suspect FSR3's equivalent (Fluid Motion Frames technology) won't be any better, and in some cases will be clearly worse. It will be at least somewhat interesting, but for this announcement, the new GPUs are clearly the headlining topic. And we can't have huge headlines, or things look screwy. 🤷‍♂️

I do understand that, but this is news coverage. Not first impression or review of the said tech. When i see news articles about rumoured specs of GPUs, CPUs, Mobo in Tom's and i dont see an article mentioning FSR3 in the title, it looked odd...

 

[Colif]

AMD having reasonable FSR 3 features removes a selling point for Nvidia as in a lot of reviews, its just features that make the difference. So AMD levelling play field, even if the features aren't overly useful, means the ball is back in Nvidia's court.

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

The RX 7800 XT is going to be an incredible value but only because the market is already so screwy. What people aren't talking about is the effect that the RX 7800 XT will have on the price of the RX 6800 XT. That price is going to have to fall considerably if the RX 7800 XT's performance numbers are to be believed.

Currently, the RX 6800 XT is $510 and if the RX 7800 XT is $500 with ~25% more performance, more resistant to RT performance drop, better power efficiency, longer driver support and an AV1 converter to boot, the RX 6800 XT could see a price drop of $75-$100 which will cause a domino effect on the prices of the RX 6800, 6750 XT, 6700 XT, 6700, 6650 XT, 6600 XT, 6600 and 6500 XT that are still available.

GeForce cards were already such bad values that I couldn't recommend them unless the person was adamant that they needed a GeForce card for CUDA work or whatever. That situation has gotten even worse for nVidia because few people here are comfortable recommending that someone pay more money for less performance.

AMD's own numbers suggest it will be more like 5~10 percent faster than a 6800 XT and pretty darn close to 6900 XT. So, I don't think I'd call that an incredible value. I also suspect the Navi 21 parts are probably close to drying up, but I don't know that for sure. It may just be that AMD has reached the point where it has to release Navi 32.

This is feeling very much like the situation AMD found itself in back in ~2017 where RX 570/580 had way too much supply and no demand left. Navi 21 GPUs have had good pricing for much of the past year, but they're not selling too quickly by all indications. But with RX 7800 XT landing at $499, that will probably push 6800 XT down to $449 at best, and RX 6800 down to maybe $399 or less. And if the 6800 sells for <$399, RX 6750 XT would need to drop down to $299, pushing everything else down as well.

It's really messy from the standpoint of launching a new product, and I'm not sure how much any of these will sell. The RX 7800 XT definitely seems the better of these new cards, though, and at least carves out some room for itself in the $499 range (assuming it consistently beats 4060 Ti / 4060 Ti 16GB). RX 7700 XT at $449, though... smdh. It's nearly the full Navi 32 GCD (6% less compute), but with 25% less memory and 31% less bandwidth, all for 10% less money.

 

[Avro Arrow]

AMD's own numbers suggest it will be more like 5~10 percent faster than a 6800 XT and pretty darn close to 6900 XT. So, I don't think I'd call that an incredible value. I also suspect the Navi 21 parts are probably close to drying up, but I don't know that for sure. It may just be that AMD has reached the point where it has to release Navi 32.

Yeah, you're right. I misread what I had been reading and I fixed my original post. I thought it was being compared to the 4070 Ti, not the 4070 (my bad). With so many content creators calling it a great value, it didn't occur to me that I had read it wrong because against the 4070 Ti, it would be a great value. As you rightfully point out however, since it's against the 4070, it's not that good.

This is feeling very much like the situation AMD found itself in back in ~2017 where RX 570/580 had way too much supply and no demand left. Navi 21 GPUs have had good pricing for much of the past year, but they're not selling too quickly by all indications. But with RX 7800 XT landing at $499, that will probably push 6800 XT down to $449 at best, and RX 6800 down to maybe $399 or less. And if the 6800 sells for <$399, RX 6750 XT would need to drop down to $299, pushing everything else down as well.

Well that makes sense because both scenarios were post-mining craze.

It's really messy from the standpoint of launching a new product, and I'm not sure how much any of these will sell. The RX 7800 XT definitely seems the better of these new cards, though, and at least carves out some room for itself in the $499 range (assuming it consistently beats 4060 Ti / 4060 Ti 16GB). RX 7700 XT at $449, though... smdh. It's nearly the full Navi 32 GCD (6% less compute), but with 25% less memory and 31% less bandwidth, all for 10% less money.

AMD made their own mess here through stupidity and greed. I've said many times that Sasa Marinkovic should've been fired by Lisa Su as soon as she saw that sorry excuse for a product lineup. I mean, come on, THREE RX 7900 cards? How the hell did that happen? AMD totally screwed themselves (and everyone else) with this stupidity.

 

[headloser]

AMD announced the Radeon RX 7800 XT and Radeon RX 7700 XT at its Gamescom session today, powered by the Navi 32 GPU. The cards will be available on September 6.

AMD Announces Radeon RX 7800 XT at $499, RX 7700 XT at $449 : Read more

Sorry but forget about it. Radeon RX 7800 XT will cost abut $675.88 CAN. NOPE i guess i wait another year or two before i can afford it. I hope my CPU AMD 5600G built-in GPU will last that long.