-
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.
RTX 4070 12GB, is it Worth it?
- Thread starter Author_25
- Start date
- Status
With the way new RT games demand VRAM, surely after three generations of RTX the only the 3090 and 4090 and the 4080 can hope to run new games without actually running out.
Although, while the push for upscalers largely stems from the fact that with RT almost all cards come to a crawl (and if the RT is full path then even the 4090 needs upscaling), upscalers also require less VRAM. Well, yes, running at 720P does too!
Although, while the push for upscalers largely stems from the fact that with RT almost all cards come to a crawl (and if the RT is full path then even the 4090 needs upscaling), upscalers also require less VRAM. Well, yes, running at 720P does too!
An abomination to all of mankind.
Its why i don't get the obsession with RT for GPU's at anything below the 3090, its near useless for anything below that.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 14,582
The number of games that in the ballpark of 0-5% difference swinging both ways are around the same in number (6 games on each side) in that review, so it evens out hence why I didn't see the point of of including them.So you just list all the games were the 7900XTX is faster and you remove all the others that is equal or slower?
The average from Techpowerup 4K Rasterization comparison 7900XTX vs 4080 show that the 7900XTX is 2% faster compared to 4080 (excluding RT) and to be honest reviewers like the Techpowerup should stop excluding RT from the average.
A 4080 can fit on midi tower no problem you don't need a full-size tower, in fact a 4080 is more suitable on a midi tower than the 7900XTX due to the lower heat output. Also the non reference designs have similar size regardless if it is 4080 or 7900XTX.
Also the so-called 2% performance different in "relative performance" in the way that Techpowerup stacking up all the performance across all the games and then taking the average from the total is only good for a "general reference", but not an accurate reflection of performance of the cards in actual gaming performance on game by game basis;
The key take-away from that analysis is that out of 25 games that are tested are:
- 6 games Nvidia are less than 5% faster
- 6 games AMD are less than 5% faster
- 2 games Nvidia is around 5.5% faster and 1 game 12.7% faster vs AMD with 5 games at 6.5-10% faster and 5 games at 13.9-21% faster
So to put simply worst case scenario at 4K Rasterization the 7900XTX would barely be any slower than the 4080, but most of the time it would be either be a little bit faster, moderately faster or quite a bit faster than the 4080.
Last edited:
From 285w for the TI to 200w for the RTX 4070 is a reduction in power of about 30%.
Considering that the RTX 4070 has the same memory config, I wonder it it can be assumed that the number of shaders will be 30% lower also?
Which would put it at around 5376 (down from 7680 for the TI). Tbh, I hope not because that would suck.
Especially since the RTX 4080 mobile has 7424 shaders (also based on AD104).
A good shader count would be anything over 6000.
Considering that the RTX 4070 has the same memory config, I wonder it it can be assumed that the number of shaders will be 30% lower also?
Which would put it at around 5376 (down from 7680 for the TI). Tbh, I hope not because that would suck.
Especially since the RTX 4080 mobile has 7424 shaders (also based on AD104).
A good shader count would be anything over 6000.
Last edited:
But then your card has an almost generous 12GB frame buffer and you are "only" on wide QHD!
It just works
Not as useless as most your posts. My 3080 Ti has played many RT games just fine
Still on that agenda of his I see and as usual, posting with nothing to back up his claims
Love how RTX is apparently now useless on anything below the 3090:
Given rdna 3 can sometimes perform worse than even a 3080 in RT, then rdna 3 must be doa for RT too.....
Last edited:
Of course it does, real time ray tracing is incredibly intensive hence why nvidia made DLSS in the first place. Thankfully the upscaling tech is so good (well for dlss anyway), no reason not to use it as proven by various review sites now.
Last edited:
Why bother, lots of graphics cards need upscaling or frame gen to play at 4K resolution without RT.
They need to add the ability to lower the detail/ resolution of the ray traced parts of frames, which lots of games don't do, or do poorly.
It's not worth cutting framerates in half, especially when most graphics cards already struggle without RT on in demanding titles.
Last edited:
A great card
I've been happily playing games with RT and DLSS at 90+ fps on my 3080 (along with many others) so why would I turn it off? Only one game so far where I have chosen to turn it off as it looks like **** and that's hogwarts.
Don't disagree though, there should be better fine grained options for RT settings and not just on, off.
RDNA 3 is slower than ampere in RT. You won't see it on the averages cause averages include games with barely any RT effects. A 4080 is around 45 to 50% faster than XTX in RT horsepower.Given rdna 3 can sometimes perform worse than even a 3080 in RT, then rdna 3 must be doa for RT too.....
Have I ever - ever - ever said that ada are aggressively priced? Nope. But I get it, when you don't like what is said but can't argue against it cause it's correct, you start the strawmans.
I'd sooner buy the 7900XT.
Τhe normal XT? Over the 4080? Ohkay I guess?
Going by history, you would likely end up getting the 4070, same way you bought the 970, 2070 over amds alternatives.......
- Status