Doom: The Dark Ages, 36 GPU Benchmark

[BogdanR]

Well I don't think that price / performance is that simple. For example, the 5080 is ~30% faster (35% at 4k) in RT (TPU test btw), and even more so in PT games, to the point that the 9070xt is closer to a 5060ti in path tracing while the 5080 is twice as fast. So if Im playing Alan wake PT, Cyberpunk PT, witcher 3 remake etc. the 5080 isn't that bad of a value as you make it up to be and the 9070xt is terrible, barely matching the 5060ti.

Well it is pretty simple when you focus on the titles which are not optimized for AMD. You forgot Indiana Jones BTW. AMD’s performance is simply terrible there.

So since you’re cherry picking to suit your argument, why don’t I do the same and point to the present Doom title in which the 9070XT is better than the 5080? Or I can shift the argument like you did and bring about the unavoidable reality of how awfully underwhelming the performance bump of Nvidia’s current 5000 series is over the former 4000 series.

But then again I’m not going to do that so we’ll talk if and when Nvidia drops the 5080 10-15% below MSRP and the average gaming enthusiast can readily order one online or pick one up in a LOCAL brick and mortar store for that price.

Cheers!

 

[Strawman]

Well it is pretty simple when you focus on the titles which are not optimized for AMD. You forgot Indiana Jones BTW. AMD’s performance is simply terrible there.

So since you’re cherry picking to suit your argument, why don’t I do the same and point to the present Doom title in which the 9070XT is better than the 5080? Or I can shift the argument like you did and bring about the unavoidable reality of how awfully underwhelming the performance bump of Nvidia’s current 5000 series is over the former 4000 series.

But then again I’m not going to do that so we’ll talk if and when Nvidia drops the 5080 10-15% below MSRP and the average gaming enthusiast can readily order one online or pick one up in a LOCAL brick and mortar store for that price.

Cheers!

I'm not cherry picking, amd is lagging behind in rt and PT. It's a fact. The more of those effects are used in games, the bigger the gap.

So if someone is interested in using it, suddenly the 9070xt isn't a good value. It's actually horrible.

 

[BogdanR]

I'm not cherry picking, amd is lagging behind in rt and PT. It's a fact. The more of those effects are used in games, the bigger the gap.

So if someone is interested in using it, suddenly the 9070xt isn't a good value. It's actually horrible.

Actually what you just did IS cherry picking.
But whatever.
Cheers!

 

[Strawman]

Actually what you just did IS cherry picking.
But whatever.
Cheers!

Are you cherrypicking when you are looking at raster performance? So how am I cherrypicking when looking in RT performance?

 

[BogdanR]

Are you cherrypicking when you are looking at raster performance? So how am I cherrypicking when looking in RT performance?

Ah so you FINALLY got it! Both of us can be right!
Congratulations!
Now can we stop?
I know I will.

 

[Stoly]

I assumed a nightmare setting would have 4k textures.

I don't see gamedevs been stuck with 8gb. It makes sense for consoles as they have limited VRAM, but not PCs. You can always have higher res textures.

 

[EvilRebar]

I think you are.
I understand now why you argue endlessly for Nvidia. Enjoy your 4080 Super. It is slightly better price/ quality ratio than the 5080. Again, reality.

If a part doesn't meet my needs, it doesn't matter how cheap it is. The 7900XTX was a stinker.

 

[EvilRebar]

Well I don't think that price / performance is that simple. For example, the 5080 is ~30% faster (35% at 4k) in RT (TPU test btw), and even more so in PT games, to the point that the 9070xt is closer to a 5060ti in path tracing while the 5080 is twice as fast. So if Im playing Alan wake PT, Cyberpunk PT, witcher 3 remake etc. the 5080 isn't that bad of a value as you make it up to be and the 9070xt is terrible, barely matching the 5060ti.

This is what I ran into on my 7900XTX. On paper it was really fast, but even in older games like Witcher 3 it would tank without heavy upscaling and frame gen. Wasn't worth the 15% savings over a 4080.

 

[BogdanR]

If a part doesn't meet my needs, it doesn't matter how cheap it is. The 7900XTX was a stinker.

I sure understand that and that is your choice as a consumer. I agree with that 100%.
But we were talking about the 9070XT vs the 5080 here and AMD’s potential to do very well with some optimization, which in this Doom title it actually does.
In this respect, your experience with the 7900XTX is not relevant, I hope you understand that.

 

[loki1944]

I continue to be very happy to have bought a 7900xtx and I imagine many 9070xt owners are pretty happy too

I have a 7900XT alongside RTX 3080, 3080Ti, and 4080 Super; 7900XT is a fantastic card; only ***** I foud was that it refuses to boot with my i7 980X while my older AMD (HD 7970, R9 290, 290X, 390, 390X, Nano, Fury, Vega 56, Vega 64)and all my Nvidia cards (GTX 580, 680, 690, 770, 780, 780Ti, 980Ti, 1080Ti, Titan Xp, RTX 2080Ti), do.

 

[AMN3S1AC]

"Doom: The Dark Ages is a well-optimized game that plays smoothly at 1440p with upscaling enabled."

That's not running smoothly at 1440p if upscaling is enabled.

 

[AMN3S1AC]

How is it possible for it to not look much better than Eternal, but run way worse? I swear I never pay for graphical upgrades anymore with new gpus, only the ability to play games that still look the same at lower fps....it is crazy.

 

[BogdanR]

I have a 7900XT alongside RTX 3080, 3080Ti, and 4080 Super; 7900XT is a fantastic card; only ***** I foud was that it refuses to boot with my i7 980X while my older AMD (HD 7970, R9 290, 290X, 390, 390X, Nano, Fury, Vega 56, Vega 64)and all my Nvidia cards (GTX 580, 680, 690, 770, 780, 780Ti, 980Ti, 1080Ti, Titan Xp, RTX 2080Ti), do.

That sounds like motherboard incompatibility, most likely due to version or power draw from the PCI-E slot.
(Edit) The i7 980X has PCI-E ver 2.x compatibility and the 7900XT is ver.4. Maybe a firmware update would cure your compatibility issues but that would be a long shot.
Also the bandwidth of that ver 2.x slot would severely bottlneck any newer GPU.

 

[loki1944]

"Doom: The Dark Ages is a well-optimized game that plays smoothly at 1440p with upscaling enabled."

That's not running smoothly at 1440p if upscaling is enabled.

Exactly.

 

[EvilRebar]

I sure understand that and that is your choice as a consumer. I agree with that 100%.
But we were talking about the 9070XT vs the 5080 here and AMD’s potential to do very well with some optimization, which in this Doom title it actually does.
In this respect, your experience with the 7900XTX is not relevant, I hope you understand that.

The point is that a part either does what I want or it doesn't. If AMD can't deliver the ray tracing experience of my 4080S in demanding titles they failed the clear the bar.

A solution that is 20% cheaper or 80% cheaper doesn't work either way.

I brought up my 7900XTX as it was a case where I fell for "close enough and 20% cheaper" only to find that ray tracing was dismal, drivers were amateurish, and you're always behind on features and dev support.

 

[BogdanR]

The point is that a part either does what I want or it doesn't. If AMD can't deliver the ray tracing experience of my 4080S in demanding titles they failed the clear the bar.

A solution that is 20% cheaper or 80% cheaper doesn't work either way.

I brought up my 7900XTX as it was a case where I fell for "close enough and 20% cheaper" only to find that ray tracing was dismal, drivers were amateurish, and you're always behind on features and dev support.

I was with you until you said AMD’s drivers were “amateurish”.
This one thing sort of shows you most likely never owned the AMD card you’re claiming to have owned, or, if you did, it was a totally uninformed purchase, and now you’re simply compensating by posturing heavily on Nvidia’s side.
This concludes our exchange on this thread and will put in perspective all our future interactions on this site.

 

[sahilchaudhari]

Absolutely phenomenal benchmarking work, Steven — this is why TechSpot continues to be one of the most trusted sources in the industry. The depth, transparency, and clarity in this review are second to none. I really appreciate the inclusion of both Ultra Nightmare and Medium presets across all resolutions, and the analysis of VRAM impact (especially the 8 GB vs. 16 GB comparison) was incredibly valuable. The lack of scaling across quality presets is eye-opening, and your visual comparisons help drive the point home.


Also, the fact that AMD’s 9070 XT outperforms the RTX 5080 in this context — even with Nvidia’s spotlight — is telling. Your work not only gives gamers realistic expectations, but also offers actionable guidance on settings, especially for mid-range users trying to balance fidelity and performance.


Looking forward to your path tracing follow-up! Keep up the excellent work.

 

[RaXelliX]

There are many many users out there who dont need 8GB of VRAM.

Then they also dont need a new card at all.

I firmly believe that having cheaper 8GB variants of cards is actually a good thing for PC gaming. It provides cheaper access to gaming whether it be through budget or second-hand cards.

Except they're not. If 8GB was half as expensive and below 200 then you argument might have merit, but it's not. VRAM is cheap. So cheap that in most cases the price difference between 8GB and 16GB cards is $30-50. Getting a severely compromised GPU for $50 less in 2025 is not helping PC gaming or helping more people to get into PC gaming. Plus there are essentially no budget cards because 8GB cards cost 300+. Even 400+ in many cases.
Second hand cards are entirely different topic and different prices.

Sure, if you pretend that it's 2010 and ignore ray tracing, upscaling quality, and other features. I couldn't sell my 7900XTX fast enough to snag a 4080 Super.

Depends on the card. 9070 XT has RT that's slightly slower than 5070 Ti. PT does not run properly on anything but 5090 anyway. Upscaling quality is now pretty much equal with FSR 4 and frame generation quality was equal already before. What AMD currently lacks is Ray Reconstruction alternative and their performance in professional rendering/video editing apps is still noticeably behind Nvidia. Those are the areas they need to focus on.

That's why we have quality settings in the main menu.

And what other settings you propose a use lowers to make the game fit into 8GB VRAM?
Aside from texture quality most settings only minimally affect VRAM usage. It's even worse with CPU scaling as all setting very minimally affect CPU performance.

almost identical to last years 4070ti S, and it costs the same money the 4070ti S cost last year. So, yeah, great card, a year later for same performance and same price

Except you cant get a 4070 Ti Super for it's last year prices anymore. Nvidia purposefully ended it's production and prices on remaining stock went to moon before it dried up before 50 series launch. Disingenuous to compare 9070 XT price to a card you can no longer get for that price. I could make the same argument for 4080S vs 5080, but I wont because 4080S is no longer available at it's last year price.

I'm not cherry picking, amd is lagging behind in rt and PT. It's a fact. The more of those effects are used in games, the bigger the gap.

So if someone is interested in using it, suddenly the 9070xt isn't a good value. It's actually horrible.

AMD's gap in RT has shrunk considerably. Thanks to Nvidia themselves by not increasing RT in 50 series at all. If Nvidia themselves does not care about RT then why should I care?

PT like I said is effectively usable on 5090 anyway. Even so - getting playable framerates requires compromises in resolution, image quality and responsiveness to achieve those playable framerates. Rendering the whole point of PT moot.

Also very few games go heavy on RT and only a handful even have some kind of PT.

 

[harm9963]

So lucky I didn't sell my 4090 , wow I paid $ 1700 at Micro Center almost three years ago !

 

[EvilRebar]

PT does not run properly on anything but 5090 anyway.

PT like I said is effectively usable on 5090 anyway. Even so - getting playable framerates requires compromises in resolution, image quality and responsiveness to achieve those playable framerates. Rendering the whole point of PT moot.

These are the kinds of misinformation that clues me in to a person never using any of this tech and just parroting talking points.

I'm on a 4080S and Cyberpunk path tracing looks phenomenal at 3440x1440 at >120FPS. It's amazing in motion. When I was on my 7900XTX path tracing did indeed seem impossible.

 

[EvilRebar]

I was with you until you said AMD’s drivers were “amateurish”.
This one thing sort of shows you most likely never owned the AMD card you’re claiming to have owned, or, if you did, it was a totally uninformed purchase, and now you’re simply compensating by posturing heavily on Nvidia’s side.
This concludes our exchange on this thread and will put in perspective all our future interactions on this site.

LOL. AMD's own patch notes confirm that the issues that I was running into were driver issues, and I ran into more issues with that AMD card over 1.5 years than all my time with my 1080Ti and 4080S.

Feel free to ignore me; it's a waste of time to argue with someone who insists that your eyes and ears are wrong.

 

[BogdanR]

LOL. AMD's own patch notes confirm that the issues that I was running into were driver issues, and I ran into more issues with that AMD card over 1.5 years than all my time with my 1080Ti and 4080S.

Feel free to ignore me; it's a waste of time to argue with someone who insists that your eyes and ears are wrong.

Indeed, it is a waste of time to listen to someone who apparently bought a previous generation AMD card to run ray and path tracing games at full tilt, essentially ignoring ALL the testing done everywhere and subsequently was mercifully saved by Nvidia. Yea, great origin story right there. Really credible too!!!

You’re funny, I’ll see you around!

 

[EvilRebar]

Indeed, it is a waste of time to listen to someone who apparently bought a previous generation AMD card to run ray and path tracing games at full tilt, essentially ignoring ALL the testing done everywhere and subsequently was mercifully saved by Nvidia. Yea, great origin story right there. Really credible too!!!

You’re funny, I’ll see you around!

It's funny how every generation AMD boosters say "these cards are a lot better at RT and almost caught up!" You might forget, but when the 7900XTX came out reviewers insisted that it performed in ray tracing like a 3090/Ti. Which would have been reasonable at the price, but...that didn't pan out at all. There was very misleading initial coverage of the card that led to a bad purchase, but I fixed the issue with a replacement.

But it was just a bum choice all around. Primitive upscaling, weak ray-tracing, and big driver issues in even huge titles like BG3.

 

[Strawman]

It's funny how every generation AMD boosters say "these cards are a lot better at RT and almost caught up!" You might forget, but when the 7900XTX came out reviewers insisted that it performed in ray tracing like a 3090/Ti. Which would have been reasonable at the price, but...that didn't pan out at all. There was very misleading initial coverage of the card that led to a bad purchase, but I fixed the issue with a replacement.

But it was just a bum choice all around. Primitive upscaling, weak ray-tracing, and big driver issues in even huge titles like BG3.

The xtx was as fast as a 3090 in amd sponsored rt games that you didnt even wanna enable rt anyways cause it looks awful (re village, dirt 5, farcry etc.) In games that rt actually makes a visual difference, yeah... No.

 

[BogdanR]

It's funny how every generation AMD boosters say "these cards are a lot better at RT and almost caught up!" You might forget, but when the 7900XTX came out reviewers insisted that it performed in ray tracing like a 3090/Ti. Which would have been reasonable at the price, but...that didn't pan out at all. There was very misleading initial coverage of the card that led to a bad purchase, but I fixed the issue with a replacement.

But it was just a bum choice all around. Primitive upscaling, weak ray-tracing, and big driver issues in even huge titles like BG3.

Hit and miss again.
For someone who claims buying a 7900XTX 1.5 years ago, here’s a small excerpt from Techspot’s 4070 review, from 2 years ago:

“Of course, the 7900 XT was faster with RT disabled, but if you care about ray tracing the RTX 4070 represents really great value at $600.”

The whole RT part of that review clearly shows Nvidia being better than AMD at EVERYTHING you claim your needs were (RT, upscaling, all that jazz). And better value, especially when RT/ upscaling is involved. And Techspot was not alone in spotting AMD’s significant shortcomings in this area where Nvidia shines.

So you need to choose: you either made a totally uninformed purchase and now taking your buyer’s remorse on AMD, or you never owned the card in question and you’re just a run of the mill AMD hater.

I really don’t care what your answer is.

Cheers and have a great day!