AMD Radeon RX 9070XT and RX 9070 review – They’re back and even available, thank goodness!

1 - Introduction and details - RX 9070 and RX 9070XT 2 - Test system and equipment 3 - Gaming: Full-HD 1920x1080 Pixels (Rasterization Only) 4 - Gaming: WQHD 2560x1440 Pixels (Rasterization Only) 5 - Gaming: Ultra-HD 3840x2160 Pixels (Rasterization Only) 6 - Gaming: WQHD 2560x1440 Pixels, Supersampling, RT & FG 7 - Gaming: Ultra-HD 3840x2160 Pixels, Supersampling, RT & FG 8 - Power consumption, transients and PSU recommendation 9 - Clock rate, temperatures and noise 10 - Summary and conclusion

AMD has finally thrown down the gauntlet with the Radeon RX 9070 and 9070 XT, taking direct aim at the recently launched GeForce RTX 5070 from NVIDIA. While the RTX 5070 has to make do with 12 GB of GDDR7 memory, AMD consistently relies on 16 GB of GDDR6 and prices both cards at a competitive 629 and 689 euros RRP respectively, although the prices of the board partner cards could certainly reach various heights here too. However, this not only counters the RTX 5070 launched yesterday, where the board partner cards often cost well over 800 euros, but also comes dangerously close to the RTX 5070 Ti for a street price of well over 1000 euros in some cases – albeit without the blessings of DLSS 4 and Frame Generation, but with solid raster performance and FSR 4.

NVIDIA was the first to deliver, but the problem is well known: Blackwell cards are once again in short supply and rather scarce on the market for the already ambitious prices. Meanwhile, AMD has obviously been able to hold back chips and cards for two months in order to flood the market with sufficient availability and attractive RRP. The calculation is simple: those who want more VRAM and solid performance for less money should probably take a closer look at the 4X 9070 XT, and those for whom the RT 5070 offers too little memory may be tempted by an RX 9070. It remains exciting to see whether NVIDIA can counter with the next drivers or an early super refresh – or whether AMD may even finally hit the nerve of buyers again with a slight lead.

And of course I hope that the MSRP (Manufacturer’s Suggested Retail Price) doesn’t become a “Massively Surpassed Real Price” here, because the actual price has so far mostly been somewhere between “outrageous” and “astronomical”. Alternatively, we can view the current prices as “Maybe Someday at a Reasonable Price” and simply wait a little longer. Of course, many people find this difficult, but it’s also possible, just take my word for it.

Important preface to the sample selection, benchmarks and conclusions

AMD has made it easy for itself this time and completely dispensed with its own reference design. In itself, this would not be a problem if the board partners did not almost without exception rely on factory overclocked models for sampling – and of course not without reason. After all, you want your own cards to look as good as possible, and if AMD itself does not contribute a standard card, testers have little choice but to work with what is provided.

However, this brings with it a practical problem: while it is at least theoretically possible to reproduce a reference clocking for NVIDIA cards using software, there is not really such a precise option in the Radeon software. So you can’t simply “activate the reference values” and make a fair comparison. Sure, you could throttle the power consumption to a reference value, but then it would be a bit skewed when it comes to the clock rate at the latest. In addition, due to a lack of time, it was simply not feasible to retest every NVIDIA card in an overclocked version – that would go beyond the scope in terms of both time and technology. However, I have included a simple comparison in WQHD in the summary, which compares the four currently competing cards with and without OC.

In order to make at least a halfway representative selection, I have chosen two of my four test samples that probably best reflect the real situation. The choice fell on the Sapphire RX 9070XT Nitro, because the XFX RX 9070 XT Mercury ran at up to 3.4 GHz in my tests – a full 400 MHz above the boost clock specified by AMD, until it unfortunately broke. So I reset everything to zero and tested it again. The XFX RX 9070 Quicksilver completes the test field so that XFX doesn’t go away completely empty-handed. In terms of performance, it is on a significantly higher level than the Sapphire Pulse, so I ended up testing two real OC cards. But here, too, I was hit by the defect witch, which is why the volume values of the XFX RX 9070 Quicksilver are missing at the end.

Incidentally, the error pattern was the same for both cards. When starting Cyberpunk 2077 in Ultra HD, the monitor already lost the signal in the intro after a brief high-pitched coil beep. After a reboot, only the HDMI connection was still working and only as a basic adapter, the display port was completely dead. I am in contact with XFX and at least the XFX RX 9070 XT Mercury has been replaced in the meantime. I hope that I’ll be able to write an individual review soon.

When we see the cumulative performance values later, we’ll have to mentally deduct around 5 to 10% performance or give the NVIDIA cards around 5% more. Because the 10% increase in performance that NVIDIA repeatedly mentions can only be achieved with simultaneous and hard-core RAM OC. And even if you were to do this math – I can spoil it right now – it could be that one or the other card could probably use a new price point. But nothing should be left on the shelf that doesn’t get there in the first place.

However, I can promise you that I have planned to test all the working cards, as well as the Blackwell cards that are still outstanding, once again as individual tests. Of course, I won’t go into the usual theoretical part at this point, as there were already two articles on this last week. One was the long version and the other a very short version, both of which I have linked to you again:

The Sapphire RX 9070 XT Nitro 16 GB

The Sapphire RX 9070 XT Nitro 16 GB weighs 1863 g (1953 g with adapter) and offers not only performance, but also some interesting design decisions. The solid light metal cooler with an installation length of 33 cm and with attached perforated metal gives the card a unique look, even if the mesh is purely decorative. It plays no role in terms of cooling, but ensures a high-quality appearance. Despite its 13.5 cm installation height and 6 cm installation depth (plus 0.5 cm backplate), the card looks relatively compact and compact. In the end, it looks smaller than it actually is.

The Sapphire RX 9070 XT Nitro 16 GB offers a well thought-out connection layout that is geared towards both classic monitor setups and modern requirements. There are two DisplayPort 2.1 ports and two HDMI 2.1a ports on the slot bracket. The card is therefore ideally equipped for high-resolution displays with high refresh rates and supports VRR as well as 4K and 8K outputs with DSC (Display Stream Compression).

A special detail is the magnetic, removable backplate. It only sits on top and reveals another cover underneath – the board itself remains hidden. Nevertheless, it has a functional use, as it covers the 12V HPWR connection at the rear.

Although this is a neat visual solution, it also means that the cable has to be fed under the backplate before it can reach the connection. The flip header ensures that the cable is routed to the rear, which makes cable management much easier and ensures a tidy appearance in the case. Unfortunately, the header does not leave a tactile and acoustic feel when it clicks into place, which is actually intended according to CEM 5.1. The adapter holds securely when plugged in, but you really have to check it carefully.

In addition, Sapphire installs an ARGB interface, which can be used to synchronize the lighting. Technically, Sapphire remains true to itself and delivers a powerful, factory overclocked card with an efficient cooling system and high build quality. More on this in the detailed individual review with detailed measured values for temperatures, noise and power consumption. Here is at least the GPU screenshot of the tested card, which shows that 90 MHz more have already been applied ex works, although even this is far exceeded.

The XFX RX 9070 Quicksilver 16 GB

The XFX RX 9070 Quicksilver 16 GB is a card weighing 1520 g, which despite its 34.5 cm length, 12.5 cm installation height and 6.5 cm installation depth (plus 0.5 cm backplate) is pleasantly unobtrusive and consistently focuses on functionality. No excessive bling-bling, no exaggerated RGB staging – instead there is a simple yet striking plastic look with piano lacquer accents as a fingerprint card. So if you’re looking for a GPU that doesn’t light up like a Christmas tree, this should be just right for you. You usually have a microfiber cloth in the house.

In terms of cooling technology, XFX relies on a massive three-fan design with a large-area radiator construction which, in combination with several heat pipes, ensures even heat distribution. The fins of the heat sink are aligned in such a way that they optimally direct the airflow and efficiently transport the waste heat away from the card. Despite the massive design, the card still remains in a frame with around 2.5 slots (for mounting), which fits into most systems without major space problems.

The XFX RX 9070 Quicksilver 16 GB is not only visually discreet, but also down-to-earth in terms of technical features. This is particularly reflected in the connections. There are three DisplayPort 2.1 and one HDMI 2.1a connection on the slot bracket. This means that the card is ideally equipped for the latest monitors and high refresh rates. DisplayPort 2.1 enables high resolutions with high frame rates, and DSC (Display Stream Compression) allows data rates to be managed efficiently without any visible loss of quality.

An interesting difference to other RX-9070-XT models can be seen in the power supply: instead of relying on the new 12VHPWR connector, XFX uses two classic 8-pin connectors (6 2 pin). This is a clear advantage for anyone who doesn’t want to use adapters or special power supply units. Plug it in and you’re done – without having to worry about potential melting problems or cable routing.

Another interesting feature is the dual BIOS switch, which can be used to switch between two profiles, one of which has reduced fan speeds for quieter cooling. This makes the card flexible, depending on whether you want to squeeze out the last bit of performance or simply have a GPU in the system that is as inconspicuous as possible. The Quicksilver therefore remains a card for purists: no unnecessary bells and whistles, but a robust power supply, a solid cooling system and a good variety of connections. More on this in the detailed individual review with detailed benchmarks and measured values for temperatures, noise and power consumption.

The clock rates are also not without merit: in my tests, the Quicksilver boosted stably up to around 3 GHz, which is well above the specifications stated by AMD (and still has room for improvement). XFX does not hold back with aggressive overclocking specifications, but the card remains pleasantly quiet. The fan profile is designed rather conservatively so that no unpleasant noises are produced even under load. When idling, the fans are of course completely silent. And so the XFX RX 9070 Quicksilver 16 GB remains a well thought-out card for all those who don’t need an exaggerated RGB show, but simply a powerful and well-cooled GPU with solid workmanship. I would also like to draw the attention of attentive readers to the PCIe version, as the card only ran with the default Gen4 with riser card. On the right you can see the screen of the defective card, without riser and in the second, identical test system

Comparison table of the technical data (reference)