We benchmark the Radeon RX 9070 XT and GeForce RTX 5070 Ti across 52 games, testing rasterization and ray tracing performance at 1440p and 4K.
Nvidia RTX 5070 Ti vs AMD Radeon 9070 XT: Massive 52 Game Benchmark
Nvidia RTX 5070 Ti vs AMD Radeon 9070 XT: Massive 52 Game Benchmark
- Thread starter Steve
- Start date
darkzelda
Posts: 441 +308
Thanks for this amazing comparison. As for myself, I'm really happy with my RX 9070 XT, quite the upgrade for my 1080ti.
yRaz
Posts: 9,292 +16,337
There is a large portion of the market that somehow thinks nVidia is a more premium product and that's just not true. Consumers are been squeezed right now and they can nolonger spend extra money based in marketing material they've seen so perhaps this will come to an end soon. Heck, nVidia didn't even list gaming revenue in their latest quarterly results so maybe they are offering up the gaming segment to AMD. They originally said they had been waiting over a decade to release Ray Tracing technology and then just last year they said they had been waiting almost 20 years to release AI data center cards so who even knows what they're doing. Jensen sounds like a meth addict, or on some type of stimulants, in some if his latest interviews
Yes it's true, as you can see 5070 Ti wins here, and has option for better features with alot more support in the actual games.
9070 XT might be better value, especially when looking at rasterization only, yet many people don't care about just raster these days. They want the entire package to be good:
DLSS/DLAA continues to beat FSR/FSR Native in both quality and game support.
Frame Gen, Nvidia wins very easily. Less issues, less input lag, less smearing, works much better overall. Even Smooth Motion beats AFMF, less artifacts and less issues.
ShadowPlay beats ReLive, better quality, lower perf hit.
Reflex beats Anti Lag (or should we call it FSR Latency Reduction) = Less input lag on the Nvidia side.
DLDSR beats VSR, as the perf hit is lower on the Nvidia side due to AI cores doing magic. DLSS/DLAA can even be used on top. FSR can't do that. This makes sense to to for many. Take a silly 1080p monitor. Enable DLDSR to get downscaled 4K/UHD, apply DLSS and your perf hit will be low while making native 1080p look plain bad.
Nvidia still have better RT (and especially Path Tracing) perf. FG/MFG and Upscaling is very important here as well, so this is a Win/Win/Win for Nvidia. Typically you combine them all.
What people pay for on the Nvidia side, is features and actual game support of these.
I would pick 5070 Ti over 9070 XT any day of the week if price is the same or close.
Only if 9070 XT is 25% cheaper, preferably more, it will make sense to me. That is current pricing pretty much.
9070 XT is not a bad card, but it is not high-end by any means. Neither is 5070 Ti. These offerings are upper mid-end at best.
My 4 year old 4090 beats both with ease and just continues to impress me.
AMD cancelled the bigger RDNA 4 SKU sadly. 9070 XT is a 5070 Ti counter, and still loses overall. For the price, 9070 XT still makes sense for many but NO-ONE would pick 9070 XT if they were offered to pick a FREE CARD between these two.
FSR 3.1 was pure garbage and still is. FSR 4.x is decent but DLSS 4.x is still the superior upscaler and DLAA also beats FSR Native. Anyone who claims otherwise has no clue and is biased. I have tried them both multiple times.
DLSS 1 and FSR 1 was trash. Pure garbage.
With DLSS 2, people began using it. That is 6 years ago and it just kept improving since.
FSR 4 is vastly better than FSR 2/3 luckily, yet DLSS 4 is the superior option.
Looking at the whole picture, features included, is the reason many buy Nvidia still. Many don't care about paying 10-20% more for better support. Most don't look at just rasterization performance these days.
Last edited:
Obvously, 1080 Ti is almost 10 years old and GTX lineup is pretty much dead at this point. Nvidia have full focus on RTX.
I had 1080 Ti too, 6-7 years ago. Even then it felt slow, and I upgraded to RTX 3080 back in 2020. Massive leap and full support for DLSS/DLAA. One of the biggest upgrades ever.
9070 XT is obviously a night vs day upgrade over a dated 1080 Ti. I still see people claim 1080 Ti is a beast in 2026, they must have no clue about new hardware because it is dirt slow and has zero support for the features that makes Nvidia truly good these days, DLSS/DLAA/DLDSR/Reflex/etc.
yRaz
Posts: 9,292 +16,337
You literally have freeze frames and zoom in on pixels now to see the difference. In real world gameplay, the upscaling features are indistinguishable.
And I don't want to hear about framegen on anyone's hardware. Unless you're already getting 250+, the latency from framegen ruins gameplay.
No you don't, I have tried FSR 4 and DLSS 4.x side by side multiple times, as I build PCs for other people. The difference is still easily noticeable, however FSR 4 is much better than FSR 3.1, which is almost useless due to artifacts and shimmering.
Again you have zero experience, FG/MFG makes alot of sense for people with high refresh rate monitors. You don't feel the latency at all when fps is already good, yet 400 fps with MFG will look much smoother than 100 fps without it. Even 200 fps with "just" FG will look vastly more smooth than 100 fps and best of all, minimum fps is affected by FG/MFG too. 240 Hz is pretty much sweet spot today. Any gamer should be on 240 Hz minimum, unless you are a casual gamer.
You can ramble all you want, these features is the reason Nvidia dominate the market. If no-one cares, why would AMD spend time and money try match it.
Buying a GPU in 2026 while only looking at rasterization perf is big no-no.
Why do you think AMDs prime focus with RDNA 4 was Ray Tracing, PT Perf and Upscaling? It is what gamers want and what new AAA games is pushing. Upscaling is literally default in demanding AAA games now, and DLSS rules supreme, in both quality and support.
9 out of 10 new AAA games have DLSS/DLAA.
Even if you don't like upscaling, DLAA will literally make native look bad. NoAA is garbage, even at 4K/UHD. Jaggies, shimmer. Yuck.
DLSS 4 (and FSR 4) both have top tier built in AA plus sharpening applied on top. Native gaming is dead to me. I never play games at native with no improvements. Looks terrible.
Old games with no DLSS support, is typically played with DLDSR. Transforms older games to look like remasters.
And all this is why most people gladly pay a little extra for good features...
FOMO will make you deny reality tho.
Just like AMD GPU owners hated upscaling, till they got a RDNA 4 and FSR 4 capable card, then upscaling was great.... Haha, Humanity 101
Last edited:
Nvidia Wins Features, AMD Wins Value
WHAT FEATURES?!!
IT'S PRICE TAG???!!!
Cmon Steve... it is basically the same offering with a different price tag...
By the way... where are my summary performance charts? 52 game benchmarks and unable to make a 2 summary charts? Really?
WHAT FEATURES?!!
IT'S PRICE TAG???!!!
Cmon Steve... it is basically the same offering with a different price tag...
By the way... where are my summary performance charts? 52 game benchmarks and unable to make a 2 summary charts? Really?
Anyway, I take 8 pins molex connectors over 12VHPWR connection any day of the week for RELIABILITY. Didn't Nvidia went through a series of driver issues lately also?
Feels to me that AMD actually wins "FEATURE"...
Feels to me that AMD actually wins "FEATURE"...
I stopped there because I knew you were brainwashed.
Nvidia and AMD basically have the same product on the shelves and one is about 30% more expensive than the other. You need to be delusional to even imply there is a clear win between the two because there isn't. At least, you don't need to worry about that 12VHPWR connector or Nvidia releasing drivers wrote by AI entirely.
Sony is not using Nvidia features beside a couple of PC offerings, that they are abandoning altogether to focus on their games on the console. PSSR 2 and FSR 4 are basically going to take over because they are Open Source and Nvidia is abandoning gaming, and it kind of already did because game developers are focusing on console. There is basically no games that are done exclusively for PC anymore, they are all just ported.
Theinsanegamer
Posts: 8,735 +17,801
DLSS, DLAA, FG, and of course support from the gaming space are all features.
FSR4 redstone is in 2 GAMES. TWO!!!!! That is absolutely pathetic. DLSS4+T is pushing 200 titles now.
It is under" performance summary".....did you forget to read the article in full?
Talking about other people being brainwashed while repeating the "nvidia is abandoning us" dogma and talking about Open Source dominating, after 20 years of open source not dominating, is top KEK.
What bias are you suggesting is present in this review? Why would a slower processor fix that?
How about you pay them to test with your preferred CPU? Surely it would be cheap since doing this testing is so easy, right?
Then they should. 99% of games. Including brand new ones are a mix of raster and RT. Very few games are purely RT or PT.
That's like buying an hybrid car and saying you dont care about the price of gasoline, because you're driving a hybrid now.
It is shortsighted and makes no logical sense. Raster will continue to be used for decades because it's cheap and refined.
RT and PT should only be used contextually where it makes sense and where they save development time like reflections, GI etc.
Things that "can" be done in raster, but take too much time to be worth the effort.
Doh. I would pick a RTX 6000 Pro too if it was the same price as a 5070 Ti. Everyone would.
I dont know anywhere it's "only" that much cheaper. In most places it's near 50% cheaper. Some places even more.
Assuming they were offered an Nvidia card of equal performance, then dont be so sure.
Many people running Linux would choose AMD regardless. Or people burned by Nvidia.
Assuming no one would chose the XT over the Ti if they were the exact same price is just laughable wishful thinking. Starting with the fact that they've never been the same price.
I doubt that. Nvidia has the market share they have because of mindshare on OEM sales. Radeon's presence in OEM desktop and laptop models is almost nonexistent. DIY market is much smaller compared to that and even smaller is the portion of people on the DIY market that know about Nvidia's features and how they differ from AMD's.
People hate bad tech. A biblical revelation people!
People hated DLSS1 too and for good reason. Dont act like it's somehow exclusive to AMD GPU owners.
It's human nature.
Nvidia literally moved gaming under "Edge computing". That's what it is for them now. A minor footnote somewhere near the edge of periphery.
Open Source has dominated for decades in case you haven't noticed. Most of the world runs some form of Linux or it's derivatives.
With a few exceptions of proprietary software. The only reason these are still relevant are their feature sets and backward compatibility, that is not easy for new open source projects to match or exceed.
However if they fall off then no one is going to miss them either with their predatory business practices.
Nope. PT is becoming mainstream with big titles now and you can forget that with an AMD card. I literally switched from AMD to NVIDIA because of path tracing and I don't play games anymore that don't at the very least have RTGI. And no, certain things cannot be done in raster, no matter what you do.
And NVIDIA literally last year showcased their Zorah demo which was rendered entirely with primary rays even in path tracing. No raster was used whatsoever. So raster will die within the next few years, I would expect. Not vanish completely, but for AAA it will no longer be relevant. We see that already now as many games come with mandatory ray tracing because it saves so much time and cost. Raster is legacy, it's old, it looks **** and it can die for all I care.
9070xt all day, every day! Do the research, input lag - similar, fps - similar, quality - similar. There are no Nvidia feature advantages. Nvidia owners want to justify paying more and it's not there. Certain games do support Nvidia or AMD better, supposedly, rn Nvidia owners have been posting that PT is broken in Resident Evil Requium - which isn't supported in the game for AMD - so, that "advantage" doesn't seem like a feature advantage. The only major difference I see rn, is multi-frame gen, giving higher fps with PT in Cyberpunk 2077. I'm actually getting 70+ with plain old 2x frame gen. AMD is bringing multi-framegen and I'll test it out to see if it's "better" in certain situations. I spent $700 for the 9070xt, when the 5070ti was $1,000. The only cards better imo, are the 5080 and 5090. I won't replace my 9070xt until 5090 performance is more affordable.
Lol, "mainstream". There are only low double digit games (there are hundreds of games total released each year) with the option to enable PT because surprise surprise, most of Nvidia's own cards cant run it properly due to it's computationally intensive nature. The higher end cards may produce some sort of playable experience with both upscaling and FG enabled as mandatory, but most Nvidia cards cant even rely on those to get a playable experience.
As for AMD I think you're greatly underestimating the effect of software optimization. They recently demoed PT on a PS5 Pro. That's AMD RDNA3 era hardware.
The fact that it could run it at all was impressive. Digital Foundry covered it.
RDNA5 will likely be built with PT in mind and I wouldn't put it past RDNA4 cards running it with proper optimization in the future.
Then enjoy not playing most games as most games dont gave RTGI.
Everything can be done in raster. It's a matter of resources and time. Competent real time reflections and GI were done long ago, but it's not worth it with raster. Takes too much manual work.
RT and PT are not revolutionary technologies that allow doing something unheard of before. I think you've been spoon fed too much marketing about the new tech.
No one cares about tech demos. Produce a $300 card capable of running it realtime with popular resolution and base framerate. Then we'll talk.
There have been games like Q2 RTX and Portal RTX.
Like I said. Raster will be around for decades to come. Unless we discover unobtanium and APU's suddenly start doing PT at 120fps+ native. Raster's benefits are too useful to ignore.
People like you only see black and white, but the world is gray.
Like I said before: "Contextual use". Use each technology where it makes sense.
Dont put RT or PT in a multiplayer games. Use it sparingly to limit performance impact and use it only for things that are too time consuming to accomplish with raster.
Use raster where it makes sense to use it.
TL;DR how much more $$$ are you willing to pay for DLSS, Optix and a few other things?
As for people saying that "raster is no longer relevant", stop deluding yourselves. It's just embarrassing to hear ppl say that.
As for people saying that "raster is no longer relevant", stop deluding yourselves. It's just embarrassing to hear ppl say that.
Last edited:
seeprime
Posts: 1,208 +1,867
Which one do you believe is suitable for gaming comparisons. In Steve's past CPU comparisons AMD X3D typically outperforms Intels best, on gaming. Check his YouTube channel Hardware Unboxed and see for yourself.
Axeia
Posts: 1,034 +1,428
Whenever a gamers nexus video starts with some Jenssen footage it's hilarious.
Like this one:
To think that this is the guy running the worlds most valued company in the world would be funny, if it wasn't for PC hardware prices being so sad.
Bluescreendeath
Posts: 506 +724
Great benchmarks. I really don't understand why Crimson Desert is AMD sponsored but Nvidia performs better in it, while Resident Evil Requiem is Nvidia sponsored but AMD performs better in it.
The two games should have swapped sponsors.
The two games should have swapped sponsors.
Probably because their in-house engine BlackSpace prioritized Nvidia when it was originally built. AMD joining the fray for a specific game doesn't mean they'll rewrite it, although they probably did do some small optimizations.
It was a GPU comparison not a processor. Needed to know if there was an advantage with AMD CPU to not be biased.
A wild guess, they optimize drivers for each game to the best of their ability. Which means AMD, for example, does not get the advantage over Nvidia like it does in CoD.
Similar threads
