• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

OcUK GUIDE TO ORDERING YOUR AMD 9070 GRAPHICS CARD TODAY AT 14:00

no_1_dave said:
Exactly my point... AMD again have held it back for thousands of gamers. It's their 3rd gen with it so there is no excuse.
Click to expand...
The third gen of playing catch-up to the other team - and playing at a quite different price point, for which there are grounds for accepting that not all aspects of relative performance will be the same.
 
ICDP said:
Why do you keep ignoring that PT is actually playable on RDNA4? You are acting like it is utterly unusable on anything but Nvidia.

At the same price point the nearest Nvidia competitor still needs upscaling at balanced or performance at 1440p.

All these comparisons of a 9070 XT to a 5070Ti seem to ignore they are not remotely the same price tier.
Click to expand...

Because they're a lot less performant with it to start with, so even when upscaled there will be a huge gap.

Also because it annoys me... I need a graphics card for my daughter's PC and will likely get a 9070 or 9070XT because it makes the most sense, but this is niggling at me because without this performance gap in PT these would be pretty much perfect cards for that mid-tier budget. It's like which ever card I choose I have to sacrifice something which I shouldn't have to sacrifice. Whether it be vram, money or PT performance.
 
ICDP said:
At the same price point the nearest Nvidia competitor still needs upscaling at balanced or performance at 1440p.

All these comparisons of a 9070 XT to a 5070Ti seem to ignore they are not remotely the same price tier.
Click to expand...
This.

Disregarding stock availability, the cheapest 9070 XT here is £650; the cheapest 5070 Ti is £800 - that's a 23% delta - so the 5070 Ti should be *expected* to be 23% more performant.
 
ChosenName said:
This.

Disregarding stock availability, the cheapest 9070 XT here is £650; the cheapest 5070 Ti is £800 - that's a 23% delta - so the 5070 Ti should be *expected* to be 23% more performant.
Click to expand...

When you turn on path tracing the standard 5070 performs better than the 9070XT and it shouldn't be this way. Not on 3rd gen hardware
 
no_1_dave said:
When you turn on path tracing the standard 5070 performs better than the 9070XT and it shouldn't be this way. Not on 3rd gen hardware
Click to expand...
Whether it should, or should not, be this way rather depends on the perceived "value" of PT to each company designing GPUs, i.e. what proportion of users will be able to actually use it to improve their game experience and how many cards will it sell.

PT would seem to be in the "early adopter" phase, i.e. only those with sufficiently deep pockets will get decent performance without upscaling of some kind.
 
no_1_dave said:
When you turn on path tracing the standard 5070 performs better than the 9070XT and it shouldn't be this way. Not on 3rd gen hardware
Click to expand...

You are clearly just ranting now for no reason. AMD have largely matched the PT performance of the 5070 to the point both deliver similar performance at 1440p with upscaling. 10% or so slower is NOT significant for a 9070 XT to a 5070.

The DF video compares GPUs at very different price tiers. They also utterly fail to point out the 9070XT is only 10% slower in PT than the 5070. It is 10% faster in Psycho RT and about 18% - 20% faster in raster and has 4GB more VRAM.

I’m sorry you are ****** off at the current PT state, but stop comparing the 9070 XT to a GPU £150 - £200 more expensive and calling it “a fail”.
If PT is that important go buy a clearly inferior in every other metric 5070 just so you can get 26 FPS instead of 23 FPS in PT without upscaling at 1440p.

I’ve tested the 9070 XT with Path tracing at 1440p and balanced FSR4 and it is genuinely playable. At these price point you are talking negligible difference in actual real world playable settings for path tracing. In raster and in most other use cases you have a much better GPU.
 
Last edited:
ICDP said:
You are clearly just ranting now for no reason.
Click to expand...

You could be right about this...

I'm just **** off because no matter which GPU I pick I'm leaving something on the table and it almost seems deliberate from both AMD/Nvidia. With Nvidia it's the extortionate price and lack of vram and with AMD it's lack of performance in an area that's clearly gaining traction. It could be that I'm making a bigger deal of it than it really is, it'll be my daughter using it at the end of the day and not me. But I can't help feeling ripped off no matter which choice I make.
 
no_1_dave said:
I'm just **** off because no matter which GPU I pick I'm leaving something on the table and it almost seems deliberate from both AMD/Nvidia. With Nvidia it's the extortionate price and lack of vram and with AMD it's lack of performance in an area that's clearly gaining traction. It could be that I'm making a bigger deal of it than it really is, it'll be my daughter using it at the end of the day and not me. But I can't help feeling ripped off no matter which choice I make.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree - it's always a trade-off, i.e. on price, raw performance, VRAM, power consumption, new features, availability, game adoption of features, etc..

It'd be nice to be able to go out and buy "the best" card at a price point but it's always going to be a compromise of competing desires.
 
ICDP said:
You are clearly just ranting now for no reason. AMD have largely matched the PT performance of the 5070 to the point both deliver similar performance at 1440p with upscaling. 10% or so slower is NOT significant for a 9070 XT to a 5070.

The DF video compares GPUs at very different price tiers. They also utterly fail to point out the 9070XT is only 10% slower in PT than the 5070. It is 10% faster in Psycho RT and about 18% - 20% faster in raster and has 4GB more VRAM.

I’m sorry you are ****** off at the current PT state, but stop comparing the 9070 XT to a GPU £150 - £200 more expensive and calling it “a fail”.
If PT is that important go buy a clearly inferior in every other metric 5070 just so you can get 26 FPS instead of 23 FPS in PT without upscaling at 1440p.

I’ve tested the 9070 XT with Path tracing at 1440p and balanced FSR4 and it is genuinely playable. At these price point you are talking negligible difference in actual real world playable settings.
Click to expand...
Cyberpunk2077-2025-03-01-09-32-29-557.jpg


A 250w 4070TI released in January 2023...
 
Bacalhau said:
Cyberpunk2077-2025-03-01-09-32-29-557.jpg


A 250w 4070TI released in January 2023...
Click to expand...

Wait, so an $800 GPU that is about 20% slower in raster at 1440p (25% at 4K), has 4GB less VRAM and is matched in PT in a heavily Nvidia optimised game. Oh no, the 9070 XT obviously sucks considering the lower launch price (even with scalping). not only that, you have enabled frame gen.

Try harder next time. At least have the decency to compare the entire experience and if taken as a whole the 9070 XT is a much better product than the 4070 Ti.

I wanted the 9070 and XT to be cheaper, but let’s not pretend it’s not at least moving the needle to make RT more mainstream.
 
Last edited:
ChosenName said:
It's not just availability and pricing now though - what was availability and pricing like at that time?
Click to expand...

The only thing that really matters is the pricing close to the release of the new card, because that is what is being replaced.

There is no getting past the fact that a 9070xt at over £700 is a horrible price/perf increase over the outgoings generation, because there barely is any price/perf increase!
 
Jono8 said:
The only thing that really matters is the pricing close to the release of the new card, because that is what is being replaced.

There is no getting past the fact that a 9070xt at over £700 is a horrible price/perf increase over the outgoings generation, because there barely is any price/perf increase!
Click to expand...
I'm using 80w less at 100% load (350w vs 430w) and getting better raster, RT and upscaling than my XTX it has replaced. All while being paid over £100 to change.
I'm super happy.
 
Jono8 said:
The only thing that really matters is the pricing close to the release of the new card, because that is what is being replaced.

There is no getting past the fact that a 9070xt at over £700 is a horrible price/perf increase over the outgoings generation, because there barely is any price/perf increase!
Click to expand...
The 9070 XT seems to be trading blows with the $999 7900 XTX that went before in some respects, and the $899 7900 XT - which seems to be some way from "horrible" performance / price, and represents quite an improvement in price / performance - and that's before inflation in the intervening period is taken into account.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom