AMD Radeon 9070 and 9070 XT final specs and official performance benchmarks leaked

Daniel Sims

Posts: 1,876   +49
Staff
Highly anticipated: AMD will officially reveal the tech specs, pricing, and launch information for the Radeon RX 9070 graphics cards on Friday. However the leaked details keep on coming, enough to get an estimate of their performance ahead of release. VideoCardz claims to have acquired the company's official benchmark charts (and now the full tech specs for both GPUs), which show performance gains in 20 games compared to the Radeon 7900 GRE.

Update (Mar 5): TechSpot's Radeon RX 9070 XT review is now live.

Update (Feb 26): Videocardz has published what they claim are AMD's confirmed specifications of the Radeon RX 9070 series, set to launch next month with the Navi 48 GPU. The Radeon RX 9070 XT features 64 RDNA 4 compute units, 64 ray accelerators, 128 AI accelerators, and 4096 stream processors, with clock speeds of 2400 MHz (game) and up to 2970 MHz (boost), delivering 48.7 TFLOPS of single-precision compute performance. The standard RX 9070 has 56 CUs, 56 ray accelerators, 112 AI cores, and 3584 stream processors, with respective lower clock speeds.

Update #2 (Feb 26): With just days before AMD's official launch, temporary listings on Micro Center (now removed) have revealed price points for the upcoming GPUs. The cheapest RX 9070 graphics card was listed at $649.99, and the most affordable RX 9070 XT appeared at $699.99, both Asrock models.

  AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT AMD Radeon RX 9070
Architecture RDNA 4 RDNA 4
Manufacturing Process 4nm 4nm
Transistor Count 53.9 billion 53.9 billion
Die Size 357 mm² 357 mm²
Compute Units 64 56
Ray Accelerators 64 56
AI Accelerators 128 112
Stream Processors 4096 3584
Game GPU Clock 2400 MHz 2070 MHz
Boost GPU Clock Up to 2970 MHz Up to 2520 MHz
Peak Single Precision Throughput Up to 48.7 TFLOPS Up to 36.1 TFLOPS
Peak Half Precision Throughput Up to 97.3 TFLOPS Up to 72.3 TFLOPS
Peak INT8 AI TOPS Throughput Up to 779 TOPS w/ Sparsity Up to 578 TOPS w/ Sparsity
Peak INT4 AI TOPS Throughput Up to 1557 TOPS w/ Sparsity Up to 1156 TOPS w/ Sparsity
Peak Texture Fill-Rate Up to 730.3 GT/s Up to 564.5 GT/s
Peak Pixel Fill-Rate Up to 190.1 GP/s Up to 161.3 GP/s
ROPS 128 128
AMD Infinity Cache 64 MB (3rd Gen) 64 MB (3rd Gen)
Memory 16GB GDDR6 16GB GDDR6
Memory Speed 20 Gbps 20 Gbps
Memory Bus Interface 256-bit 256-bit
PCIe Interface PCIe 5.0 x16 PCIe 5.0 x16
Total Board Power 304 W 220 W
Recommended Power Supply 750W 650W
Display Connectors HDMI 2.1b DisplayPort 2.1a UHBR13.5 HDMI 2.1b DisplayPort 2.1a UHBR13.5

VideoCardz says that AMD expects its upcoming Radeon RX 9070 XT graphics card to outperform the 7900 GRE by about 42 percent in a mixture of raster and ray tracing 4K workloads. If the leaked internal benchmarks prove accurate, the 9070 XT and standard 9070 could trade blows with Nvidia's RTX 5070 Ti and 5070 if the price is right.

The report indicates that AMD compared its upcoming GPUs to models from prior generations in over 30 games. The tests, pictured below, utilized ultra or maximum graphics settings without upscaling or frame generation, contrasting starkly with Nvidia's methodology.

It's unclear why AMD chose the RX 7900 GRE for comparison, but it might be because it has the same amount of VRAM as the 9070 family. Against the Radeon 6900 XT, the 9070 XT's average performance advantage grows to 51 percent. Meanwhile, the standard 9070 beats the 7900 GRE by around 20 percent and outperforms the 6800 XT by 38 percent in 4K.

The benchmarked titles include games with hardware-accelerated ray tracing, such as Cyberpunk 2077 and Star Wars Outlaws, and raster-only titles like God of War Ragnarök and Starfield. Team Red also tested Cyberpunk and F1 24 with and without RT.

The new GPUs exhibit more significant gains in ray tracing than in raster performance. The RX 9070 outpaces the 7900 GRE by between four and 28 percent in raster, but the lead grows to 38 percent in RT. Similarly, the 9070 XT beats the same older card by 23 to 46 percent in raster and up to 68 percent in RT.

Click to enlarge

VideoCardz reached out to AMD, which said that it hadn't acquired RTX 5070 Ti samples for direct comparisons with Nvidia. However, a Redditor attempted to approximate one by lining AMD's averages from six games up against prior benchmarks for several of Team Green's GPUs.

Please take the results with a grain of salt. They don't incorporate FSR 4 – a critical improvement exclusive to RX 9700 – but appear optimistic for AMD. Although the 9070 XT might not match the RTX 5070 Ti in ray tracing performance, it likely outpaces every prior AMD card and matches the 5070 Ti in raster. The standard 9070 might resemble the RTX 3090's raster performance and should almost reach the 7900 XTX in RT.

Pricing is the most crucial element, but a recent leak suggests that the company's two upcoming GPUs could land between $600 and $700. They are expected to launch early next month, likely butting heads with Nvidia's standard RTX 5070. Detailed performance metrics for the $549 mid-range card remain unclear.

Permalink to story:

 
What we want as consumers is AMD to give Nvidia a bloody nose. It is clear that after the excellent Pascal GPUs Nvidia has become complacent and has driven GPU prices to an unsustainable level.

Blackwell's launch has been mishandled, the performance gains minimal. Stock terrible. Partner price gouging. The door is wide open for AMD. It must be able to take advantage and at least significantly close the gap in performance. Specifically in ray tracing and AI upscaling. There must be competition and a correction in the market. AMD must step through the door and not fumble this launch.

Everyone needs 9070XT to achieve these advances and be priced aggressively, whether you plan to buy a card or not. It benefits all buyers. I wait with bated breath.
 
AMD will be able to match nVidia's MSRP as the 50 series is selling well above MSRP. What I see happening is AMD cards matching MSRP and actually selling for MSRP instead of selling for ~20%+ more than MSRP.

We're seeing $1000 5070Ti's, no way we're going to see an AMD MSRP of below $750 for the 9070XT.
 
The problem is that AMD has been perfectly happy to position their cards just below NVidia’s pricing. We need disruptive pricing, but I don’t see any evidence that’s going to happen.
AMD is going in on iGPUs/APUs, not dGPUs. AMD's 8070S iGPU is said to have 4060 level of performance and with the absurd cost of GPUs lately, I think plenty of people would be happy with that. The chips are also technically MOBILE chips. It means handhelds, laptops, miniPCs. If the future of Desktops are GPUs that cost as much as used car and still can't play modern games then maybe the power play is to just not participate in the highend.

I keep asking people, what experience is at the highend that's worth paying $3000 for? I tend to "dabble" in new games, but most of what I play are EvE, ESO, BGS3 and SM2 over the last 2 years. None of those games warrant spending $3000+ on. Maybe EvE, but that's a unique beast that deserves its own conversation for reasons that apply to very few people. That thing with EvE, is that I can play it 4k120 max settings on a 6700XT
 
AMD is going in on iGPUs/APUs, not dGPUs. AMD's 8070S iGPU is said to have 4060 level of performance and with the absurd cost of GPUs lately, I think plenty of people would be happy with that.

Biggest problem is price. As great of an achievement as it is, at a starting price of $2100+, Strix Halo is either competing in gaming with the upcoming 5070Ti Mobile (which it won’t win against, period), or Apple’s MacBook Pro in professional/creative work (another tough fight, albeit more feasible than the 5070TiM). At $2100, they’re assuming it’ll be low-volume.
 
Most of what I play these days is older as well, though I’m playing FPS games. Like what you described, I don’t need a new GPU, but I think we’re still a ways off from a viable iGPU for the type of gaming I like at 1440p. To your point, though, I won’t be paying the crazy prices either… ant least not on a regular upgrade cycle. Mostly, I’d just like to see AMD undercut NVIDIA and drive prices down, but I don’t think they really want to do that.
 
I truly hope Team Red don't fudge this up, they have a rare golden opportunity to achieve a number of business objectives... (market share, customer poaching, value for money public sentiment, etc...)...
In fact, they SHOULD use the old idiom "lose the battle, win the war" here...
Of course if wishes were horses....
 
Biggest problem is price. As great of an achievement as it is, at a starting price of $2100+, Strix Halo is either competing in gaming with the upcoming 5070Ti Mobile (which it won’t win against, period), or Apple’s MacBook Pro in professional/creative work (another tough fight, albeit more feasible than the 5070TiM). At $2100, they’re assuming it’ll be low-volume.

$2100 is not Strix Halo's starting price.

It's the price for a ROG-branded tablet from Asus, notorious for their overpricing of high-end gaming gadgets. Example: Asus Astral 5090 is listed at $2800, a full 40% or $800 over stock. But don't worry, it was only marked up to $3080 before going OOS.

Better wait for other Strix Halo devices before judging price & value.
 
So 9070 is faster than 7900XT in raster and faster than 7900XTX in RT, 9070XT is probably as fast as 7900XTX in raster and a fair bit faster in RT. If 9070XT is $650 or less then I will finally update my 6800XT.
 
$2100 is not Strix Halo's starting price.

It's the price for a ROG-branded tablet from Asus, notorious for their overpricing of high-end gaming gadgets. Example: Asus Astral 5090 is listed at $2800, a full 40% or $800 over stock. But don't worry, it was only marked up to $3080 before going OOS.

Better wait for other Strix Halo devices before judging price & value.
I suspect we will see all in one devices like SteamDecks and ROG Ally's with a StrixHalo in them for ~$1200. The 50 series is so lack luster that we have to wait another 2 years for an upgrade. The 50 series is barely worth paying attention to, esspecially at current pricing and all the RDNA4 is going to bring us is basically a price drop(and better Linux support, although I'm one of the few excited for that). There is going to be no imporvment in graphics until the 60 series is released so I think we're going to see more optimizations by devs and a "return to sanity" by most of the gaming community considering that $3000 graphics cards can't play modern games at 4k30 without up scaling.

I'm currently sporting a 12700 non-k with a 6700 XT, Strix Halo in a MiniPC is looking real attractive if they can keep it the whole thing under $1000. I'd be willing to pay ~$1500 for a top of the line strix halo with 64GB of ram and 2, 2TB NVME drives. The other thing about those APUs is you can assign up to half your memory to them as VRAM. That makes them really interesting for local AI models. If local AI models end up being the future people are talking about, an APU with 128GB of VRAM will be a lot more useful than a 16GB 5080.

I see AMD working on their long game
 
$2100 is not Strix Halo's starting price.

It's the price for a ROG-branded tablet from Asus, notorious for their overpricing of high-end gaming gadgets. Example: Asus Astral 5090 is listed at $2800, a full 40% or $800 over stock. But don't worry, it was only marked up to $3080 before going OOS.

Better wait for other Strix Halo devices before judging price & value.


Given the fact that HX 370 devices launched at ~$1500, I wouldn’t be surprised if 395 MAX devices launched +$500-600 over that.

Will they cut prices? Sure. But until they do, you have to go by the market. And based on what it has shown to be capable of, 8060S devices really need to land in the $1300-$1400 range to make sense. That’s considering the fact that it has 16 Zen 5 cores AND a 32GB RAM minimum requirement too.

Could Unified System Memory be a selling point? Maybe. But gamers won’t see the benefits of it as much as pro/creator/AI workloads. Although, at $1500 you’re now getting into MacBook Pro territory.
 
I find it amusing that people think that this card will compete with a similarly priced Geforce that has similar average frame rates.

Average frame rates really don't tell the story these days. People aren't spending thousands of dollars on a GPU because it offers the most frames for their dollar. The market proves this year in, year out. Features are an enormous factor. Ray tracing and DLSS adds a lot of value. If this card is only 10% on average faster than a GeForce card for the same money, it's too expensive.

Also, il keep saying it. Please stop complaining about the prices, they are simply not going to come down. Get used to it and enjoy the technology. Otherwise you'll just be perpetually miserable.
 
I'm so glad I'm out of this crazy rip off,theve been killing pc with these prices for years,I couldn't stomach it any longer and went and bought a ps5

I was going to say exactly this. Nvidia being greedy F*ucks, is killing the PC master race. A lot of people just cant afford a modern day PC and will just opt for a console if casual gaming is all they want. And seeing as the consoles have AMD chips in them, nvidia are indirectly given money to AMD.
 
I find it amusing that people think that this card will compete with a similarly priced Geforce that has similar average frame rates.

Average frame rates really don't tell the story these days. People aren't spending thousands of dollars on a GPU because it offers the most frames for their dollar. The market proves this year in, year out. Features are an enormous factor. Ray tracing and DLSS adds a lot of value. If this card is only 10% on average faster than a GeForce card for the same money, it's too expensive.

Also, il keep saying it. Please stop complaining about the prices, they are simply not going to come down. Get used to it and enjoy the technology. Otherwise you'll just be perpetually miserable.

You are right, people do not spend thousands of dollars for gimmicks, they only need to buy the lowest Ada Lovelace, or Blackwell to use NVidia's marketing "features", why spend more? Incidentally, when you start paying ovr $800+ you are seeking PERFORMANCE, not gimmicks or features. As You are PAYING for more raw power, not for additional features.


Blackwell architecture can not compete with RDNA4 for gaming. No matter how NVidia tried to market & sell their gimmicks. AMD will destroy them in performance/price. RDNA4>Blackwell in gaming.



 
$2100 is not Strix Halo's starting price.

It's the price for a ROG-branded tablet from Asus, notorious for their overpricing of high-end gaming gadgets. Example: Asus Astral 5090 is listed at $2800, a full 40% or $800 over stock. But don't worry, it was only marked up to $3080 before going OOS.

Better wait for other Strix Halo devices before judging price & value.

Strix Halo won't be going anywhere. Its only saving grace is affordable access to a large amount of memory. That could be great for AI if nothing else. But of course, it's on AMD's software stack so that's effectively DOA.

For gaming focused PCs as well as general purpose devices, unified memory and quad channel memory are terrible solutions. It is neither truly performant nor anywhere near cost effective.

It's fked.
 
You are right, people do not spend thousands of dollars for gimmicks, they only need to buy the lowest Ada Lovelace, or Blackwell to use NVidia's marketing "features", why spend more? Incidentally, when you start paying ovr $800+ you are seeking PERFORMANCE, not gimmicks or features. As You are PAYING for more raw power, not for additional features.


Blackwell architecture can not compete with RDNA4 for gaming. No matter how NVidia tried to market & sell their gimmicks. AMD will destroy them in performance/price. RDNA4>Blackwell in gaming.
AMD always beat Nvidia on price/performance and the market overwhelmingly picks Nvidia pretty much every time. And it's not because consumers are stupid or because they have been conned it's because Nvidia offer a more compelling solution for the high-end buyer. You really think people would pick a few more fps per dollar over being able to use DLSS? (Which gives those fps back and then some) I don't, I think DLSS is certainly no gimmick and much more important than the average cost of the frame as long as the cards are within a certain margin of each other. And ray tracing, I'm guessing you don't like it but I do, I think it's fun to see real time lighting in games. And I have enjoyed playing around with it, if I'm spending top money I would want the option to play with it.

Blackwell will outsell RDNA4 several times over if the market follows suit. So, I'm not sure how you have concluded that Nvidia won't be able to compete with it.
 
AMD always beat Nvidia on price/performance and the market overwhelmingly picks Nvidia pretty much every time. And it's not because consumers are stupid or because they have been conned it's because Nvidia offer a more compelling solution for the high-end buyer. You really think people would pick a few more fps per dollar over being able to use DLSS? (Which gives those fps back and then some) I don't, I think DLSS is certainly no gimmick and much more important than the average cost of the frame as long as the cards are within a certain margin of each other. And ray tracing, I'm guessing you don't like it but I do, I think it's fun to see real time lighting in games. And I have enjoyed playing around with it, if I'm spending top money I would want the option to play with it.

Blackwell will outsell RDNA4 several times over if the market follows suit. So, I'm not sure how you have concluded that Nvidia won't be able to compete with it.
Stupidity is a massive factor. I've worked at a computer shop and you have no idea how many people believe that their G210 is faster than anything AMD have because NVIDIA have the fastest hardware.
 
AMD will be able to match nVidia's MSRP as the 50 series is selling well above MSRP. What I see happening is AMD cards matching MSRP and actually selling for MSRP instead of selling for ~20%+ more than MSRP.

We're seeing $1000 5070Ti's, no way we're going to see an AMD MSRP of below $750 for the 9070XT.

Rumors from the same source that leaked these figures point to MSRP: $650 for XT, and $550 for non-XT. Premium models should have a good clock boost and price.
 
Strix Halo won't be going anywhere. Its only saving grace is affordable access to a large amount of memory. That could be great for AI if nothing else. But of course, it's on AMD's software stack so that's effectively DOA.

For gaming focused PCs as well as general purpose devices, unified memory and quad channel memory are terrible solutions. It is neither truly performant nor anywhere near cost effective.

It's fked.
People keep talking about about AMD's launch drivers with Vega like that's still relevant today. Do people even remember WHY AMD got the bad name for drivers? It's a talking point that almost no one remembers where it came from and hasn't been true in almost a decade.
 
Back