Review AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT Review: The Lateral Pass

[Admin]

The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT covers the middle performance tier for RDNA 3 GPUs. Despite the model number upgrade and other architectural changes, gaming performance isn't significantly better than the previous generation RX 6800 XT.

AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT Review: The Lateral Pass : Read more

 

[oofdragon]

IMO its good at $500 since its on par with 6950XT when overclocked. Lets be honest It should have been at least a hair faster than the 6950XT at factory settings but since its $100 cheaper and virtually runs games just the same, its a solid offering. I feel though that at 1440p a card like the 6800XT is plenty enough, now at around $400 on eBay... and while the 7700XT could be a good deal at around that price, we also have the RX6800 with 16GB for $100 less......

My two cents then, anyone into 60fps gaming should just stick with the 6700XT for 1080p and 6800XT for 1440p, why spend more to get the same? At 4K theres the 7900 series for $700/$800 playing any game just the same as the 4090 at half the price, AMD is a no brainer this gen. I went 7900 also for high refresh 1440p and that single game worth playing with RT enabled

 

[AgentBirdnest]

From the perspective of a 1440p RTX 2060 owner - who has had my heart set on, and has been saving up for an RTX 4070 for the last few months, I have to say:

I wish I bought a Free-Sync instead of G-Sync monitor (there was no "G-Sync compatible" at the time.) Because the 7800XT is mighty compelling. 4070-like performance for $100 cheaper, and even the ray-tracing performance is close enough that I probably wouldn't notice in most games. A 50-watt difference is actually enough to make me uncomfortable after an hour of gaming in this room. But for $100 less than the 4070, I might be able to live with that.
But I can't live without my variable refresh rate, and am not willing to splurge on a new monitor that I don't need. So, a higher-priced card for me, unless Nvidia drops the price a few bucks or makes a compelling Super-refresh before the end of the year, but I won't hold my breath.

The 7700xt is just... puzzling. All I have to say is, "Why?"

As always, props for the great review, Jarred! I haven't read through every page just yet, I'll do that a bit later. But the benchmarks and analysis I saw so far look great. Thanks for the hard work.

 

[Elusive Ruse]

It's a better 6800XT at a lower price, nothing exciting as far as generational leap goes but it beats every card at its price point.

 

[Frozoken]

Just so u know u absolutely need to undervolt amd cards when overclocking them to get extra performance. Techpowerup was seeing roughly 15% gains in fps from their oc

 

[Avro Arrow]

It's a better 6800XT at a lower price, nothing exciting as far as generational leap goes but it beats every card at its price point.

Sure, but it's SUPPOSED to do that. The cost per frame is SUPPOSED to go down every generation. Remember how the $500 RTX 3070 was slightly faster than the $1200 RTX 2080 Ti? That's what's supposed to happen.

The RX 7800 XT is supposed to be Navi 31, just like the RX 6800 XT is Navi 21. AMD is royally screwing people here with a deceptive naming scheme.

 

[Colif]

it competes well against 4070 if you don't use RT, and its cheaper.
It walks all over both 4060 models.

neither AMD or Nvidia have a perfect record this generation when it comes to naming really.

 

[Elusive Ruse]

Sure, but it's SUPPOSED to do that. The cost per frame is SUPPOSED to go down every generation. Remember how the $500 RTX 3070 was slightly faster than the $1200 RTX 2080 Ti? That's what's supposed to happen.

The RX 7800 XT is supposed to be Navi 31, just like the RX 6800 XT is Navi 21. AMD is royally screwing people here with a deceptive naming scheme.

I don't buy GPUs based on their names. For me it's quite simple; I buy the best bang for my buck regardless of the badge and name.

 

[Upacs]

I don't buy GPUs based on their names. For me it's quite simple; I buy the best bang for my buck regardless of the badge and name.

Exactly. What matters is price/performance ratio (and features and stability). Naming is irrelevant and only for the clueless consumer that assumes higher is always better. But none of those here, right?

 

[Why_Me]

This looks to be a decent card for 1080P, not so much for 1440.

 

[PEnns]

I am really tempted to buy the 6800 XT and call it a day (and wait for another 2-3 years maybe).

The 7800 XT seemed like a decent new card - but the deal breaker was the loudness but nothing else really.

 

[CharlesOCT]

The powercolor 7800XT + starfield bundle seems like a winner for 500. In between 4070 and 4070ti performance and with 4GB extra memory.

 

[evdjj3j]

I want a new gpu for Starfield and this is tempting, but I downloaded the DLSS mod and FSR is so much worse than DLSS that I can't do it.

Thanks for the review Jarred.

 

[Avro Arrow]

This is absolute trash. It's as bad as I feared it would be. This is a direct result of AMD screwing with their nomenclature. People were trash-talking nVidia for the RTX 3080 12GB, and rightfully so but we should have also been trash-talking AMD for doing essentially the same thing with the RTX 7900 XTX and XT. Then they came out with the RX 7900 GRE (HUH?) and nobody batted an eyelid.

If AMD had named their cards correctly, this is what we'd be seeing:

The RX 7900 XTX should be the RX 7800 XT because the rival of the RX 7900 XTX is the RTX 4080, the card that replaced the RTX 3080, the rival of the RX 6800 XT. AMD just CHOSE to call it the RX 7900 XTX to try and justify its pricing because they saw how nVidia went nuts with the RTX 4080 and thought "If we call it something really fancy, like the RX 7900 XTX, people will think it's something special and we can charge $1000 for it while still looking good compared to nVidia!" even though, functionally, the big RX 7900 XTX is just the real RX 7800 XT.

We can move down the list from there:
RX 7900 XT = RX 7700 XT, replacing the RX 6700 XT; just as the RTX 4070 Ti replaced the RTX 3070 Ti.
RX 7900 GRE = RX 7700, replacing the RX 6700; just as the RTX 4070 replaced the RTX 3070.
RX 7800 XT = RX 7600 XT, replacing the RX 6600 XT; just as the RTX 4060 Ti replaced the RTX 3060 Ti.
RX 7700 XT = RX 7600, replacing the RX 6600; just as the RTX 4060 replaced the RTX 3060.
RX 7600 = RX 7500 replacing the RX 6500 XT; nVidia has no replacement for the RTX 3050.

This "RX 6800 XT" and "RX 7700 XT" are really just level-6 cards which is why they barely beat the level-8 card of the previous generation. The one good thing that AMD did was give the Radeons more VRAM than the cards they replaced. I'll explain:

The RX 7900 XTX replaces the RX 6800 XT so it's a 50% increase in VRAM (16-24)
The RX 7900 XT replaces the RX 7700 XT so it's a 67% increase in VRAM (12-20)
The RX 7900 GRE replaces the RX 7700 so it's a 60% increase in VRAM (10-16)
The RX 7800 XT replaces the RX 6600 XT so it's a 100% increase in VRAM (8-16)
The RX 7700 XT replaces the RX 6600 so it's it's a 50% increase in VRAM (8-12)
The RX 7600 replaces the RX 6500 XT so it's a 100% increase in VRAM (4-8)

This is what should have been. This is how it all would make sense. This is why we seem lost in a jungle of contrived nomenclature.

The generational upgrade from the RX 5700 XT to the RX 6700 XT was 35%. The generational upgrade from the RTX 3080 to the RTX 4080 was 50%. So, the RX 7900 XTX, which is RX 6800 XT + 50% is the real RX 7800 XT.

The problem with nVidia -> Great generational performance uplift, but double the price.
The problem with AMD -> Either almost no generational performance uplift but the price drops or
great generational performance uplift, but also almost double the price.

AMD tried to obfuscate their price gouging with some BS naming scheme. That naming scheme will be damaging to Radeon going forward because people will no longer instinctively know what nVidia card they correspond to.

Sure, nVidia did worse price gouging than AMD, but they hid behind Jensen Huang's lies (Moore's Law is dead). Now yeah, they're still creeps but they were smarter about it because they didn't screw with their nomenclature and thus kept their performance tiers intact. Since AMD hid behind a BS naming scheme, their performance tiers are no longer intact. You can no longer tell which of the market leader's cards (nVidia) that a Radeon would be comparable to just by reading the number.

AMD has done serious damage to Radeon in this way and they deserve to suffer for it. I bought the natural replacement for my RX 6800 XT, the RX 7900 XTX, but it's still just an RX 7800 XT to me.

 

[Colif]

This looks to be a decent card for 1080P, not so much for 1440.

I said that elsewhere, the 7900xt is better suited to 2k on the AMD side. It depends on what refresh rate you are happy with I guess. If you have a 144hz monitor, the 7800 xt only averages around 90.

but the deal breaker was the loudness but nothing else really.

loudness? they tested the reference card, I already seen it reported to have really loud fans. The AIB cards will have better cooling, I already seen one where Sapphire fans are way quieter since they run slower. Reference card fans run at 1300 or so. Powercolor models have 3 fans as well.

 

[Avro Arrow]

I don't buy GPUs based on their names. For me it's quite simple; I buy the best bang for my buck regardless of the badge and name.

Well, the card-makers LOVE consumers like you because it means that they can pull whatever shenanigans that they want and get away with it.

 

[NeoMorpheus]

Still weaker than alternatives in ray tracing performance and AI

RT=waste of resources.

AI= ROCm works.

Alternatives=overpriced with zero regards for consumers.

That said, the performance difference between the 6800xt and 7800xt is very disappointing.

 

[Makaveli]

The 7700XT looks like a nice upgrade from the 6700XT.

however, the 6800XT,6900XT, and 7800XT are all a little too close for my liking.

 

[-Fran-]

It's not a bad card, fortunately for AMD, but it's not much better than "meh". Still, arguably, an improvement.

As I said in the announcement article/news: AV1 capabilities (confirmed OBS supports it, so NICE! Twitch testing it internally as well, as I've read and heard) and slightly better perf/watt against the previous card in the tier makes this card not trash worthy, so... Yay?

This being said and I'll repeat it: this is not a successor to the 6800XT, but the 6700XT. Look at the price/MSRP and GPU inside (N21 vs N32): it's not that AMD is "discounting" the x800XT tier, but increasing the x700XT price point by about $30 with a name swap. Not toooooo terrible all things considered, but a much different tune I'd say. Still the same crap nVidia is pulling.

Regards.

 

[Avro Arrow]

I want a new gpu for Starfield and this is tempting, but I downloaded the DLSS mod and FSR is so much worse than DLSS that I can't do it.

Thanks for the review Jarred.

Meh, the only GPUs that are worthy in Starfield are the ones that won't need DLSS or FSR for several years to come anyway.

 

[Elusive Ruse]

 

[mhmarefat]

7800 XT is the best GPU overall in this generation. If priced a little less ($400) it would truly become "970" of its time. (reminder: GTX 970 was a powerful GPU which was priced reasonably not greedily making high FPS gaming accessible to many)
Still I'm glad high GPU power is reaching to almost reasonable prices far from greed and in turn a lot more people will have access to 1440p 120 FPS which is very good for PC gaming industry.
Hopefully things are starting to go back to "sane" levels again.
Thank you for this review!

 

[Makaveli]

7800 XT is the best GPU overall in this generation.

Detail it how so?

 

[mhmarefat]

Detail it how so?

The high performance (100+ FPS Ultra in modern rasterization) combined with almost sane (almost is key word here) pricing ensures corporations and people, BOTH, will benefit from advancement of technology. PC Gaming industry can now advance to a higher level (smooth 1440p gaming for everyone).
Nvidia (and AMD to lesser extent) wants to offer the advancement of technology to the rich only. But this GPU breaks this scheme by bringing high performance to lower prices.

 

[cryoburner]

This looks to be a decent card for 1080P, not so much for 1440.

Why not? Keep in mind, review benchmarks are generally done at ultra settings that tend to look nearly indistinguishable from high settings in most games, despite the often large performance hit. And even at ultra running at native 1440p, the 7800 XT should be capable of a 60+FPS experience in practically all demanding modern titles, which I would consider the baseline for a card being "decent" for a given resolution, and can make good use of high refresh rates in less-demanding titles or with upscaling or settings turned down a notch in the more demanding ones. Compared to the competition, in most games the 7800 XT tends to offer similar performance to an RTX 4070 , or last generation's RTX 3080. Would you consider those to be 1080p cards as well?

And even with demanding raytracing implementations, performance tends to be similar to the 4060 Ti 16GB at the same price point, and in lighter implementations the 7800XT can be notably faster due to its much higher rasterized performance. While the 4060 Ti 16GB is arguably a poor value at that price, this card at least offers a significant performance upgrade for that $100 over the 8GB model, unlike Nvidia's 16GB offering. I can't say the pricing of any of these cards is all that good compared to generations past, but AMD's offering is arguably a better value than Nvidia's, at least as far as gaming performance is concerned.

The high performance (100+ FPS Ultra in modern rasterization) combined with almost sane (almost is key word here) pricing ensures corporations and people, BOTH, will benefit from advancement of technology. PC Gaming industry can now advance to a higher level (smooth 1440p gaming for everyone).
Nvidia (and AMD to lesser extent) wants to offer the advancement of technology to the rich only. But this GPU breaks this scheme by bringing high performance to lower prices.

It's a bit of a stretch to consider $500 as "lower prices". Keep in mind, Just a few years back cards under $400 were generally considered as being good for 1440p. Sure there's been some inflation, but a graphics card that costs more than an entire game console is still arguably a premium item that's not exactly targeted at the masses.

Sure, nVidia did worse price gouging than AMD, but they hid behind Jensen Huang's lies (Moore's Law is dead). Now yeah, they're still creeps but they were smarter about it because they didn't screw with their nomenclature and thus kept their performance tiers intact. Since AMD hid behind a BS naming scheme, their performance tiers are no longer intact. You can no longer tell which of the market leader's cards (nVidia) that a Radeon would be comparable to just by reading the number.

Nvidia has been constantly shifting around their product names to sell hardware at higher prices. Hardware-wise, the 4060 is arguably more of a 3050 successor positioned at a higher price point than anything. And it feels like the 4060 Ti is what what nvidia originally planned to sell as the 4060 (non-Ti). AMD's just kind of following along with their pricing and product names. Really though, the names of cards are not as important as what they offer for the money, and people really shouldn't base their buying decisions around arbitrary product names