AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT and Radeon RX 9070 Review

AMD’s next generation of graphics cards are finally here, with the RDNA 4-powered RX 9070 XT and RX 9070 finally rushing onto the stage. Positioned squarely in the mid-range performance GPU space, AMD’s new offerings attempt to look like compelling alternatives to Nvidia’s RTX 5070 Ti and RTX 5070.

The two GPUs launch on March 6th, with the RX 9070 XT releasing at a suggested price of $599, while its pared down RDNA 4 little brother, the RX 9070 comes in an SEP of $549. But how do these two cards stack up and do they provide a compelling alternative to the Blackwell GPUs in the same space?

Specifications

RX 9070 XT

• SEP $599
• Process Node: TSMC N4P
• RDNA 4 Compute Units: 64
• HW RT Accelerators: 64
• HW AI Accelerators: 128
• Peak AI TOPS: 1557 TOPS
• Boost Clock: 2.97 GHz
• Memory: 16GB GDDR6
• Memory Bus Width: 256-bit
• Bandwidth: 640 GB/s
• PCIe 5.0 x16
• I/O: 
• 3x DisplayPort 2.1 a
• 1x HDMI 2.1b
• Total Board Power: 304 W
• Recommended PSU: 750 W

RX 9070

• SEP: $549
• Process Node: TSMC N4P
• RDNA 4 Compute Units: 56
• HW RT Accelerators: 56
• HW AI Accelerators: 112
• Peak AI TOPS: 1165 TOPS
• Boost Clock: 2.25 GHz
• Memory: 16GB GDDR6
• Memory Bus Width: 256-bit
• Bandwidth: 640 GB/s
• PCIe 5.0 x16
• I/O: 
• 3x DisplayPort 2.1 a
• 1x HDMI 2.1b
• Total Board Power: 220 W
• Recommended PSU: 650 W

RX 9070 XT and RX 9070 First Look And Thoughts

Let’s address the elephant in the room: there are no reference board cards for the RX 9070 Series GPUs. Every review you read today will be from an AIB partner, including our two XFX SWIFT White Triple Fan Edition versions of the RX 9070 XT and RX 9070. 

Looking at both cards, then, you’d be remiss if you thought they were identical. And, except for the silicon itself, they are. Both are a triple fan design, aimed at keeping the RNDA 4-powered GPU cool under pressure, and the large white shroud covers a rather large heat sink mounted onto the die. 

It’s a 2.5 slot GPU, a little bit larger than even the biggest RTX 50-series Founders Edition board, though it still comes nowhere near the size of last generation’s flagship RTX 4090 Founders Edition. While early leaks suggested that the GPU would require three 8-pin power connectors, I was happy to see it only required your standard 2 8-pin connector on both of the 9070 Series GPUs (and those who don’t trust the 12VHPWR connectors thanks to melting issues on Nvidia cards the last two generations can also rejoice here). 

The RX 9070 Series is built atop the latest RDNA architecture, RDNA 4, which has gone back to a monolithic chip (unlike RDNA 3’s chiplet design). With RDNA 4, the focus is on high-end gaming workloads, as well as improving ray tracing performance over last generation’s RDNA 3 cards. This is helped by 3rd generation RT Accelerators, as well as AMD’s first foray into machine learning-powered AI upscaling with AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution 4 (FSR 4). 

AMD’s RDNA 4 ray tracing architecture is bolstered compare to RDNA 3. AMD’s new ray tracing engine allows for improved BVH structure and compression, reducing memory requirements for BVH by 60%, according to AMD. AMD’s new Oriented Bounding Boxes accomplishes this task by encoding a rotation and aligning of each box more tightly with the scene geometry, resulting in the more efficient ray traversal through the BVH structure. This also has the effect of reducing traversal hotspots throughout the scene. 

FSR 4 is the big tentpole feature of RDNA 4, however, as its the first time on AMD’s dedicated desktop GPUs we’re seeing machine learning leveraged to help upscale an image. We saw AMD hardware do this when the PlayStation 5 Pro launched last year, so it’s good to see this come to the 9070 Series. However, unlike FSR 3.1 and AMD’s frame generation solution with FSR, FSR 4 is exclusive to RDNA 4, mainly because of the 2nd generation AI accelerators within the silicon. 

Nvidia has been doing machine learning image reconstruction ever since its first ray tracing capable GPU released back with the 20-series, and it has only improved on that since, launching DLSS 4 with its new Transformer-based model with Blackwell. One of the advantages to this was near-native image quality, as well as reducing ghosting and resolving more detail across the screen. 

FSR 3 was an improvement over FSR 2 in terms of image quality, but it still struggled to provide near-native image quality in many games, especially when the game engine’s standard anti-aliasing solution was subpar to begin with. With FSR 4, machine learning aims to better and more accurately upscale the image, providing improved image quality over FSR 3. 

You can check out more about the RDNA 4 architecture from AMD’s presentation in the embed below.

RX 9070 XT and RX 9070 Benchmarks

To put the cards through their paces, we ran them through our suite of gaming and synthetic benchmarks to test performance. Positioned as a 1440p performer that can do 4K gaming workloads, we opted to test those resolutions, with both rasterized and ray tracing workloads. 

We’re using our Starforge Systems Voyager II test bench this year for all our GPU reviews. We wrote up why we made this decision in a separate post, but here are the specs for your quick reference:

• CPU: Intel Core i7-14700K
• CPU Cooler: Starforge Custom Bitspower 360mm Liquid Cooler
• RAM: Teamgroup Delta RGB 32GB DRR5 6000 CL38 (2x16GB)
• Motherboard: MSI Z790 Tomahawk Wifi DDR5
• Cables: CableMod Pro ModMesh Sleeved Cable Extensions (Black)
• Primary Storage: 2TB PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSD (min 7000 read)
• Power Supply: Corsair HX1200i 1200 Watt Platinum
• RGB Fans: 6 x Bitspower 120mm ARGB
• Case: Lian Li O11D EVO RGB Mid-Tower (SMITE Custom Printing Version)

The cards tested:

Nvidia

• RTX 5090 Founders Edition
• RTX 5080 Founders Edition
• ASUS PRIME RTX 5070 Ti
• RTX 5070 Founders Edition
• RTX 4090 Founders Edition
• RTX 4080 Super Founders Edition
• ASUS TUF RTX 4070 Ti Super
• RTX 4070 Super Founders Edition

AMD

• Radeon RX 7900 XTX Reference Model
• Radeon RX 7900 XT Reference Model
• Radeon RX 7800 XT Reference Model

As with our recent 50-series GPU reviews, we want to test these cards as they will actually be used. This means our ray tracing tests are ran using DLSS or FSR at the Performance preset and, when available, frame generation is enabled. During the time of testing, none of our normal suite of game benchmarks were available to test with FSR 4, so we spun off testing of that feature separately, like we did with Nvidia’s DLSS 4 Multi-frame Generation on our Blackwell tests. 

When we could we used in-game benchmark tools to get the most consistent, accurate run as possible each time. For Spider-Man 2, we repeated a webslinging circuit around New York towards the beginning of the game, while in Marvel Rivals we used a repeatable replay of the same section of a recent match from the same player’s perspective each time for consistency. 

With our testing bench, we also ensured that both ReSizeable BAR and XMP Profiles were active.

RX 9070 XT and RX 9070 Synthetic Benchmarks

When looking at Firestrike Ultra, 3DMark’s DX11 Test, we see the RX 9070 XT take a 21% lead over the RTX 5070 Founders Edition, though it lags behind our ASUS PRIME RTX 5070 Ti sample by 4% overall. In TimeSpy, the DX12 benchmark, fortunes flip for the RX 9070 XT, this time seeing a 4% lead over the RTX 5070 Ti and expanding its lead over RTX 5070 by 27%. However, with Port Royal, the 9070 XT falls behind the 5070 Ti by 15%, though it maintains a 14% lead over the cheaper RTX 5070.

For the RX 9070, we see it take a 9% lead over the RTX 5070 Founders Edition, while the RTX 5070 Ti is a 13% uplift over the cheaper RDNA 4 card. In TimeSpy, the RX 9070 closes that gap between the RTX 5070 Ti (which retails for $200 MSRP more than the 9070) with the latter only boasting a 3% uplift. Meanwhile, the RX 9070 bests the RTX 5070 FE by 17% here, and 14% i Port Royal, the ray tracing benchmark.

Interesting, the RX 9070 XT also beats the RDNA 3 flagship RX 7900 XTX in Port Royal by 12%, and that gap widens over the RX 7900 XT with a 30% uplift overall in the same test.

RX 9070 XT and RX 9070 Gaming Benchmarks

When comparing in-game benchmarks, the RX 9070 XT stays pretty close to the more expensive RTX 5070 Ti in standard rasterized games. At 1440p, the Nvidia GPU is just 1% faster on average in our testing, while at 4K the gap widens to just 3% for the RTX 5070 Ti. Individual games see the two GPUs stay close, with the largest gap seeing the RTX 5070 Ti faster than RX 9070 XT in Black Myth Wukong by 4% at 1440p. At 4K that gap widens to 8%. 

For RX 9070, the story compared to the RTX 5070 Founders Edition is very different. On average our XFX SWIFT RX 9070 GPU performed 10% faster at 1440p and 12% faster at 4K versus the RTX 5070. Games such as Cyberpunk 2077 see the RX 9070 8% faster on  average, while interestingly Forza Horizon 5 opens a 35% gap in favor of the RDNA 4 card at 4K. 

Both cards also perform quite well compared to both AMD and Nvidia’s last gen offerings in this class of GPU. In Cyberpunk 2077 at 1440p, the RX 9070 XT sees a 38% increase in performance over the RTX 4070 Super and a 21% increase over RTX 4070 Super Ti. Additionally, in Returnal at 4K the RX 9070 XT is giving the same level of performance as last generation’s RX 7900 XT, a card that first released on the market at $899 back in 2022. 

It isn’t until we turn on ray tracing where things swing consistently in Nvidia’s favor. Thanks to its 4th generation ray tracing cores, Nvidia’s RTX 5070 Ti and RTX 5070 perform on average better than their RX 9070 Series competitors, with the RTX 5070 Ti seeing 35% better performance on average at 1440p with RT turned on, and 16% better at 4K compared with the RX 9070 XT.

The RX 9070 is a little closer to its RTX 5070 competition, with the AMD card eking out some wins in games like Forza Horizon 5, performing 17% faster, and that’s factoring in frame generation for the Nvidia GPU. However, overall we see a 24% bump in performance for the RTX 5070 compared to RX 9070 at 1440p, and just 14% at 4K. 

RX 9070 XT and RX 9070 FSR 4 Benchmarks

Launching with 30 games featuring FSR 4 when the RX 9070 Series hits shelves this week, we tested some of the titles that will take advantage of the new ML-powered upscaler. Unlike FSR 3, FSR 4 uses Machine Learning and AI up reconstruct the image, with the aim of creating near-native image quality, especially in motion.

Despite Nvidia’s 6 year head start on this front, I’m happy to see AMD finally take this route. FSR 3 was a nice, card agnostic approach that helped in some games, but for my money it never looked nearly as good as Nvidia’s DLSS. Some games, like Deathloop tended to look pretty good, but others, Cyberpunk 2077 easily comes to mind, always looked like someone smeared vaseline on the screen. 

Thankfully, FSR 4 looks incredible, especially for the first batch of games which support the feature. 

In Monster Hunter Wilds, going from FSR 3 to FSR 4 in our tests brought out so much more detail, from the scales on a monster's skin to more refined detail in cloth textures. Spider-Man 2 no longer looked blurry in motion, one of the issues FSR 3 has had when the superhero would websling at speed throughout the skyline of New York. 

The same was the case for Marvel Rivals, particle effects from hero skills looked clearer and more refined, while ghosting around characters was all but absent, the same holding true during both multiplayer and campaign playthroughs of Call of Duty: Black Ops 6. 

FSR 4 is impressive, and I have to wonder how much of these refinements out of the gate come from Sony’s efforts on PSSR for the PS5 Pro. Either way, it’s a great first step towards matching Nvidia’s DLSS 4 quality, assuming AMD can garner more developer support post-launch.

However, the rough edges with frame generation are still there - much like we saw when FSR 3 frame generation and even DLSS 3’s frame generation were first launched. In Spider-Man 2, there is subtle silhouetting of our hero as the engine tries to caculate the frames when he spins mid-air at the apex of a websling. In Call of Duty I noticed artifacting and ghosting around flames in the opening campaign mission, detracting from the overall experience once I saw they were there (I couldn’t unsee them). But it’s a good first step. 

One issue with both cards, however, is when FSR 4 was enabled with max RT (using Performance mode) in Spider-Man 2, they seemed to hitch and, many times, crashed. Multiple times I found myself wondering whether I should include this game in our test, but after wiping and reinstalling our press driver I was able to get some consistent runs. 

Notably, this is also the only game where the RX 9070 beats the RX 9070 in all our tests when frame generation is turned on at 4K. I re-ran the tests on both cards to ensure this wasn’t an anomaly, but the results remained consistent. Pretty interesting.

RX 9070 XT and RX 9070 Thermals

Throughout our testing, our XFX SWIFT RX 9070 XT and RX 9070 remained incredibly cool. The three fan design contributes a ton to this, and even when clock speeds eclipsed 3GHz in our testing (peaking at 3225MHz on the RX 9070 XT and 3087MHz on the RX 9070), the cards never seemingly broke a sweat, peaking at 54 degrees Celsius on both cards. 

RX 9070 XT and RX 9070 Final Thoughts and Conclusion

So, what do we make of all this? The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT is great card for the money, trading blows with the more expensive RTX 5070 Ti across our rasterized tests. Being competitively priced at $599, the AMD GPU is $249 cheaper than its competitor, and while AMD still lags behind in ray tracing workloads.

However, I really wish that the RX 9070 were priced a bit more competitively as well. Retailing at $549, it’s the same price as its nearest competitor, but the pricing reminds me a bit of the RX 7900 XTX and RX 7900 XT from last generation, where the latter just did not feel like a good deal when for just a little extra money you can snag the better card. If AMD had priced the RX 9070 at $499, it would feel a bit more compelling. 

Sure, it’s a better card compared to the RTX 5070 (at least with standard rasterized workloads), but it also just feels greedy pricing it so close to the better card purely because they can. 

While AMD has made strides in its ray tracing performance, providing a true generational lift over RDNA 3, it still lags behind Nvidia by a large margin, especially when we consider driver technologies like Multi-frame Generation. Whatever your thoughts on the technology or if you consider them fake frames, it’s a selling point and one AMD just can’t compete with right now. 

There is also the issue of driver support. Nvidia’s 50-series drivers have largely been a mess since its January launch, and AMD has promised that the RDNA 4 would feature the best driver support for a launch thus far. However, with the press driver I still ran into issues of video drivers crashing (see Spider-Man 2), while other games which should support FSR 4 would simply crash when I tried to test them, a huge one being the wildly popular RPG Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2. The RPG would load just fine, but the second I tried to open the map or the inventory screen it would crash to desktop. This was only happening on my 9070 Series cards. 

I also don’t like how convoluted it feels to enable FSR 4 in games where it’s available. Some games, such as Call of Duty: Black Ops 6 had separate toggles in the in-game menu where I could choose between FSR 3.1 and FSR 4, the rest of the titles I tested had to have FSR 4 enabled using either the global game settings in the AMD Adrenalin app or by a game-by-game basis. AMD’s one-click solution, HYPR-RX can optimize your experience and, when applicable, enable FSR 4, I just wish it didn’t feel convoluted to ensure that my GPU is using the latest rendering tech. 

To be fair to AMD, Nvidia is doing some of the same on its DLSS 4 enhancements on certain titles. While many games support it natively, you have to force support through driver overrides in the Nvidia app on some popular titles like Marvel Rivals and more. So this convolution isn’t unique.

The RX 9070 XT is the flagship GPU of the RDNA 4 family, so it’s also a bit disappointing to see the company effectively cede the high-end market to Nvidia. There just isn’t anything to compete with Nvidia’s dominance on that front, and from a mind share perspective, it doesn’t help AMD long-term to just be unable to go blow for blow with their competition’s halo products. 

It’s a shame, too, because AMD has always felt competitive with native rasterized rendering in recent, years, especially as driver support matured over a GPU generation’s lifespan. This is the first time in a while where AMD has felt competitive with an Nvidia product out of the gate. So it’s disappointing to think that this launch is the best AMD will offer this generation.

All that said, if your price range is around $600 and you can find one at MSRP, the RX 9070 XT is an easy recommendation. The RX 9070 is a bit more complicated, but of the two $549 GPUs it’s a better raster card, which despite the growing adoption of ray tracing, the majority of games are still standard raster rendering. 

However, if ray tracing and forward-looking technologies like Multi-frame Generation are important to you, the recommendation gets a bit harder as AMD still lags behind on both fronts. But it’s hard to argue with the value proposition AMD offers with the RX 9070 XT especially. With only a 1% and 3% performance disparity at native rendering at 1440p and 4K, respectively, compared to the RTX 5070 Ti, the value on offer here is incredible.

If you held onto an older 6000-series GPU, or even a 20 or 30-series Nvidia card, the RX 9070 XT is a solid upgrade, even on a ray tracing front.  The RX 9070 is a little harder to recommend at $549, even if trades blows soundly with its RTX 5070 competition. 

Then there is always the argument that consoles, especially the PS5 Pro, can be a compelling option at this price category. 

Either way, the Radeon RX 9070 XT and Radeon RX 9070 are great cards, each punching above their weight class with competent 4K performance thanks in large part to its 16GB of VRAM. Competitive at native rendering compared to their Nvidia competition, AMD still struggles to keep up when tracing rays, but even then the RDNA 4 cards provide a generational uplift over similarly priced cards on the ray tracing front in the 7000-series. All in all, they are great cards, and if you can find one at retail price, could be exactly the upgrade you were looking for.

Full Disclosure: The prodcuts described were provided by the manufacturer for the purposes of this review.