• 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.

4070 ti vs 7900 xtx

wordy

wordy

wordy

Soldato
Joined
30 Nov 2005
Posts
7,345
Location
Rotherham.
Looking at getting a new PC as my I6700/1080 gtx machine is getting a bit long in the tooth (and the g/f wants it). I was planning on getting a Pc with a 4070 ti, but noticed that the 7900 xtx is about 150 quid more expensive which I can stretch to. I've got one of the 1st gen UW screens, the samsung 3840x1080 and am looking to play the latest games as high quality as possible.

Can you give me some opinions as to what is a better card please? I'm leaning to the 7900 xtx but if it's not really worth the extra then there's no point.

Thanks all.
 
In relative rasterized performance the 7900 xtx can be between 10% to 20% ahead of the 4070 ti. However, with ray tracing enabled the tables are pretty much turned 180%.

Also, in regards to feature maturity Nvidia definitely takes the lead. I'm in the same boat and definitely gravitating towards the latter.
 
With out With doubt the 7900xtx is the better card, I even think the 7900xt is a better card. It's only if your interested in RT you may find the 4070ti better, but I have zero interest in RT. Personally look at what games you play or want to play and look at the reviews for the cards to make your choice.

Also the 4070ti only has 12GB of Vram, which I think is rubbish for how much the card costs.
 
Last edited:
The 7900 XTX is a higher tier of card. Sure the ray tracing isn't the best, but we've seen with the previous gen that having much less VRAM can seriously hamper their ability to play games at highest settings with ray tracing enabled (and there's not much point using ray tracing at low settings).

For me, for £150 it is a no brainer, except for one thing, power consumption.
 
wordy said:
Looking at getting a new PC as my I6700/1080 gtx machine is getting a bit long in the tooth (and the g/f wants it). I was planning on getting a Pc with a 4070 ti, but noticed that the 7900 xtx is about 150 quid more expensive which I can stretch to. I've got one of the 1st gen UW screens, the samsung 3840x1080 and am looking to play the latest games as high quality as possible.

Can you give me some opinions as to what is a better card please? I'm leaning to the 7900 xtx but if it's not really worth the extra then there's no point.

Thanks all.
Click to expand...
The 79XTX is faster than a 4080 in raster and has higher bandwidth for higher Res and double the vram.

However NV has DLSS which is superior than AMD's FSR and DLSS3(Frame gen in supported titles) and much better RT in NV sponsored RT'ing titles.

But

AMD's Frame gen is supposedly releasing soon, and then next year Frame Gen in any DX11/12 title at the driver level.

4070ti only has 12Gb which is a highly volatile conversation around these parts but personally wouldn't get the 70ti and would just go 4070 instead.

I've ran two systems for years only using Nvidia, but this gen I got a 4070 and went 79XTX for the faster system as it didn't cost much over a 4070Ti and a lot less than a 16Gb 4080.
 
welshrat said:
Get the AMD card. 7900xt has raytracing as good as last years 3090 cards and in everything else it kills the 4070ti. Only Nvidia cards with having are 4080 and 4090 both of which are far to expensive.

12gb will be the new 8gb before we know it
Click to expand...

The 7900XT is barely better than a 3060TI with RT. Even the 7900XTX can barely beat the 10GB 3080 so nowhere near a 3090.

However, back to the OP... 7900XTX is a better buy than the 4070TI.
If you're into ray-tracing and DLSS etc than go for the 4080, not the 4070TI. The 4070TI is a rip-off of a card which imo shouldn't exist
 
no_1_dave said:
The 7900XT is barely better than a 3060TI with RT. Even the 7900XTX can barely beat the 10GB 3080 so nowhere near a 3090.
Click to expand...

This is not even close to true. Even with extreme RT games the 7900 XTX is faster than a 3060 Ti and does match or beat a 4070Ti or 3080.

Here the 7900 XTX is matching 3090Ti on average in RT at 1440p. Well above 3060Ti performance.
relative-performance-rt-2560-1440.png


Even in extreme RT while this chart does not show the 7900 XTX it shows the 7900 XT beats the 3070Ti. It doesn’t take a big leap of logic to conclude where the 7900 XTX vs the 3060Ti would be in this chart.
rt-cyberpunk-2077-2560-1440.png
 
Last edited:
ICDP said:
This is not even close to true. Even with extreme RT games the 7900 XTX is faster than a 3060 Ti and does match or beat a 4070Ti or 3080.

Here the 7900 XTX is matching 3090Ti on average in RT at 1440p. Well above 3060Ti performance.


Even in extreme RT while this chart does not show the 7900 XTX it shows the 7900 XT beats the 3070Ti. It doesn’t take a big leap of logic to conclude where the 7900 XTX vs the 3060Ti would be in this chart.
Click to expand...

Those numbers are for rasterized games with RT effects, of course the 7900XTX will be faster than a 3060TI... That isn't pure RT performance

This is:

JZs4G3e.jpg

r98VoUw.png


7900XT is no where near as fast as a 3090 at RT.

I still say the 7900XTX is a better buy than the 4070TI though as there won't be many games which use full RT like this

Don't confuse RT performance with performance when just some RT effects are switched on as that is still mainly raster performance
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TNA
no_1_dave said:
Those numbers are for rasterized games with RT effects, of course the 7900XTX will be faster than a 3060TI... That isn't pure RT performance

This is:

JZs4G3e.jpg

r98VoUw.png


7900XT is no where near as fast as a 3090 at RT.

I still say the 7900XTX is a better buy than the 4070TI though as there won't be many games which use full RT like this

Don't confuse RT performance with performance when just some RT effects are switched on as that is still mainly raster performance
Click to expand...

So just to clarify, your point is that AMD runs at a completely unplayable performance in 1 specific game which means it's a way worse choice than Nvidia which also runs at a completely unplayable performance in one specific game EVEN THOUGH in virtually EVERY OTHER RAY TRACED GAME it runs faster?

I mean....

If you're gonna clutch at straws at least come up with a better argument than that....
 
kieran_read said:
So just to clarify, your point is that AMD runs at a completely unplayable performance in 1 specific game which means it's a way worse choice than Nvidia which also runs at a completely unplayable performance in one specific game EVEN THOUGH in virtually EVERY OTHER RAY TRACED GAME it runs faster?

I mean....

If you're gonna clutch at straws at least come up with a better argument than that....
Click to expand...

Clutching at straws for what?
Was simply correcting people when they say the 7900XT is 3090 levels of performance in RT when it isn't.
Benchmarks of raster games which just have RT effects are not showing RT performance, they're diluted with raster performance, that's the point I was making.

I even said the 7900XTX is the better choice, did you not read my post before replying to it or did you just struggle to understand what I had written?
 
Last edited:
no_1_dave said:
Clutching at straws for what?
Click to expand...
1-For using CB PL as THE definitive benchmark for all things RT'ing.

no_1_dave said:
Benchmarks of raster games which just have RT effects are not showing RT performance, they're diluted with raster performance, that's the point I was making.
Click to expand...
2-For dismissing any RT'ing titles that Nvidia haven't been able to add their code to the game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom