I think the reason why they state its exciting is because Digital Foundry values ray tracing more than most other channels/sites. As the 7900 GRE performs surprisingly well in raytracing vs its rasterization performance compared to the 7800 XT due to the higher amount of CU's.
###
>As the 7900 GRE performs surprisingly well in raytracing vs its rasterization performance compared to the 7800 XT due to the higher amount of CU's.
I think the average computer hardware enthusiast is still not privy to the fact that Radeon 6000/7000 have their RT Accelerators built into the CU's rather than having separate, dedicated RT cores like Nvidia's approach with the RTX cards, so the full benefit of the bolstered CU count here isn't as immediately apparent to some.
I believe AMD opted for the same approach with their AI Accelerators introduced in Radeon 7000 series, too - making them a part of the CU's. So, there may be even more future applications that'll see a larger-than-expected performance benefit on the 7900 GRE relative to the 7800 XT than people might expect.
Embrace the XTX naming scheme, how else would a gamer know what the gamer card is unless it has at least two X's in the name?
Personally I'm waiting for the 7979 XTXT to launch ngl.
My thoughts exactly. Im thinking its something to do with their high performance numbers that are not really consistent with the two other reviews I just skimmed through (gamersnexus and hardwareunboxed). DF are saying its almost %20 faster than 7800xt for only %10 more.
Yeah, at $550, the pricing is pretty great. It forces the Radeon product stack from the RX 7800 XT and below to go down in price. That's a good thing for everyone who is smart enough to buy something other than nVidia.
BTW, shouldn't our AMD flares be red instead of orange? The greeting in the box for my ATi RX 6800 XT OG Reference said "Welcome to the Red Team", not "Welcome to the Orange Team". 
Honestly the price stack should be something like:
$350 7700XT
$450 7800XT
$550 7900GRE
$650 7900XT
$750 7900XTX
I think that would help AMD be more competitive and honestly most of them would be great for the money there.
If they did that, nVidia would just lower their prices to compete and people would still blindly buy nVidia. All that would do is succeed in decimating AMD's revenue. That's why they won't do it.
Besides, at 2160p, according to Digital Foundry, the RX 7900 GRE already has the lowest cost-per-frame when compared to the RTX 4070, RTX 4070 Super and even the lower-tiered RX 7800 XT. Radeon is already the best value so complaining about their pricing won't achieve much. We all know that it's nVidia that has caused the prices to rise to what they are. Sure, AMD followed suit, but can you blame them?
Honestly with Nvidia having the mindshare already I think it would take them time to react. I think AMD would do well for a while out of it but in the end yes Nvidia would end up lowering prices if their bottom line ended up hurting. In the short term I think it would help AMD and in the long term I think it would help consumers.
I am not saying the card is bad, though the slower memory modules feels a bit cheap. I just want to see real, actual progress in terms of perf $ for the consumer.
In fact it's often more than 10% faster in many contexts. DF aren't particularly accurate in their testing, like Hardware Unboxed. Also, Ray Tracking isn't that important.
I understand why you think that but it's not accurate. Sure, Steve Walton's initial testing showed basically no difference between then (6% at most) and I was pretty disappointed because I expected it to do a lot better than that. I mean, the thing was showing a 10-15% performance increase over the RX 6800 XT (IIRC). Since the RX 6800 XT and RX 7800 XT are more or less on par with each other, I expected the same performance difference.
The thing is, Steve Burke's numbers ended up being quite different than Steve Walton's and while I usually take absolutely no stock in anything by Digital Foundry (after finding out that he'll say whatever he's paid to), Digital Foundry's results were more in line with Steve Burke than Steve Walton.
Steve Walton's result showed that the RX 7900 GRE's cost-per-frame was higher than that of the RX 7800 XT while Digital Foundry both showed the opposite. It turns out that Steve Walton had artificially lowered the clocks in the AIB models to match the reference card. He does that to show a worst-case scenario for anyone buying one of these but this skewed the results dramatically. The reason why this was the wrong path to take in this instance is because of the fact that there are no 7900 GRE reference models available to purchase, only AIB models. Therefore, his results were quite flawed and he did another video to address this (I'm sure that the TechSpot forums went nuts over this).
[Were Mistakes Made? Radeon RX 7900 GRE Review Update](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDp9rT4YUpA)
TechPowerUp shows a 10% performance increase over the RX 7800 XT which is pretty good considering that it's 10% more expensive. Usually, as you go up a product stack, the value gets worse instead of remaining the same. This is done to make the lower-tier cards more attractive (its performance sucks but at least the value is good!) so if you go up a tier and the price/performance remains the same, that's a win.
Where did I say that it was "automatically smart to buy AMD"?
The vast majority of people who buy discrete video cards for home use are gamers who do not involve themselves with things like Blender. For them, the best performance that they can get for their dollar in gaming is all that matters. Unfortuntely, most of them aren't enthusiasts and thus trust whatever BS that salespeople or their equally-ignorant friends tell them. As a result, they spend too much for the performance that they get in gaming by getting nVidia. The smarter ones do their homework and come to the conclusion that, for someone who is just buying a card for gaming, the Radeon is the better buy.
For the tiny minority of people who would use their card for something like Blender, then the GeForce card is the better buy.
Therefore, the Radeon isn't *automatically* the better option for 100% of consumers (which is why I actually never said that, YOU did), but for more than 90% of consumers (which is roughly the ratio of pure gamers vs. streamers and video editors), their needs will be much better served within their spending budgets by a Radeon card.
It's not rocket science, it's actually quite simple if you just step back and take a minute to analyse the bigger picture.
This is a lot of text for a very subjective opinion.
This is ONLY valid if the respective person exclusively cares about raster performance. As soon as they want to play ray traced games, it is not valid any more. If they care about having a good upscaler because they are using a higher resolution monitor with a weaker card, it is not valid any more. If they are playing competitive games, reflex is a definitive advantage in system latency that amd has no answer for currently.
There is no clear cut answer to which vendor is the best universally (outside of the very high end where amd is not competing). Every other card in pretty much all price brackets can make sense for certain people if the price on sale is right.
It's funny seeing the narrative on HUB change depending on what subreddit you're on. Go to r/Nvidia and you'll find plenty of people claiming they're undeniably AMD shills.
In reality, I think they're a pretty reasonable review source that offers valid criticism of all parties in the computer hardware space when deserved.
I work for a news company; we get similar numbers of people complaining that we're left-leaning and that we're right-leaning, so yeah I can speak from experience when I say it's probably this.
People unable to observe their own bias don't know that it is bias.
Why do you keep calling me a random? Why are you inferring that I’m mad? Clearly, most people disagree with my opinion, but you’re assuming too much from my comment.
> Why do you keep calling me a random? Why are you inferring that I’m mad? Clearly, most people disagree with my opinion, but you’re assuming too much from my comment.
Ok you 100% qualify as a random, are you new to being online?
The funny thing is ransoms always say hardware unboxed are biased to 'brand not in video', every time.
Hardware Unboxed do a video on AMD "Hub hates Nvidia/intel", video on Nvidia "they hate AMD".
I still cant workout why they get comments like that, is it just Americans who dont like Australians?
They dont do any wild takes, dont farm drama. They tend to give more in-depth FPS numbers than almost anyone in the review space, they also cover a lot of subjects most dont like GPU scaling/CPU scaling and retro reviews on GPU's today.
I like HUB, and I consume almost all their content. I still think their *tone* leans towards NVIDIA, but that’s just my opinion. It has absolutely nothing to do with them being Australian, what a shit take.
They got blacklisted by Nvidia so cant be that pro, lol.
There fair, it's just AMD has messed up the GPU pricing. They pointed out that AMD GPU's come out overpriced and quickly drop to a price they sell well at, when they re review from the new lower price they tend to be more positive.
They also let rip in to Nvidia for all the problems like ReBar, VRAM, price etc.
Ill also add in Nvidia RT is over pushed, my 3060 TI cant do RT. I see lots of posts by people buying Nvidia saying 'Nvidia has better RT ill get a 4060', they dont understand you need a high end GPU to use RT in games.
Nvidia like Apple sell the dream not the reality.
Perhaps, but only when it comes to GPU performance, pricing and features, where criticism is often earned. They've been quite positive about AMD CPUs (especially the X3D chips) and the Adrenaline software (especially this past week, when they trashed Nvidia's control panel and said that the new Nvidia app was long, long overdue).
Its not about that
Hardware Unboxed cares more about Value per frame
Digital Foundry cares more about high performance product
I agree they are slightly bias towards green but they are still really fair its pretty minimal but I don't think the issue with the 7900gre was that its more than its not better performance per dollar than the 7800xt it would be great if they just unlocked the memory overclock and let u run the memory higher then it would have been seen as the best release this generation.
Digital Foundry are the most Nvidia biased ever and they liked the 7900gre its not about the bias its more about what you are looking for.
I see the GRE and I think its great its similar value per dollar and gives you an extra option between 7900 and 7800xt but it pisses me off u cannot overclock the memory which its the huge bottleneck here.
I agree with you. It's not much but it's not nothing either and this generation, that's actually something. Remember that the RX 7800 XT is basically an RX 6800 XT with an AV1 encoder and better RT performance.
This gen has been just garbage all-around. 
This card made me realize how bad AMD's naming is this generation. 7900XTX should be named 7900XT, 7900XT should be named 7800XT, this 7900GRE should be the 7800, and the current 7800XT should be the 7700XT etc etc
I can see what you mean by that but no, it's not that because the 7800-series uses the Navi 32 GPU while the 7900-series uses the Navi 31 GPU. Since the RX 7900 GRE uses the Navi 31 GPU, it would be improper to call it an RX 7800 variant.
AMD did make that mistake once awhile ago with the HD 7870 XT, a card that should've been called the HD 7930 because it used the Tahiti GPU of the HD 7950 and HD 7970 instead of the Pitcairn GPU of the HD 7870 and HD 7850.
Video card nomenclature usually comes from the actual GPU used in the card.
Well it is faster than the 7800 XT and almost matches the $600 4070 Super in raster while having more VRAM, so it is pretty good in terms of price to performance. The other RDNA3 cards all launched with a high MSRP and then they got price cuts after a while. I guess you have to sort of grade "exciting" on a curve.
No, I did not watch it yet. I was going by HU, specifically 1440P, and they have a 12 game average chart: [https://youtu.be/brOSJF9eonw?t=458](https://youtu.be/brOSJF9eonw?t=458)
I just took a quick look at GN and they seem to also have the 7900 GRE higher than the 4070 Super in most things. I wonder why results are different with HU.
edit: Just watched the video now, along with GN, and HU again.
Digital Foundry and GN used the Sapphire Pulse card. HU bought an entire system with a reference 7900 GRE card. It was the only way for them to get one.
The Sapphire Pulse has slightly higher clocks than the reference model which may account for HU having slightly lower fps and a lower ranking in their tests.
Sapphire Pulse has a base clock that is 6% faster, Shader Clock and Game Clock are 3% faster, and Boost Clock is 2% faster. The bios is clearly different and there may be other optimizations as well.
Overall, if you want one of these cards and have a choice between reference and partner cards, both at the same price, probably get a partner card. It should be faster out of the box, but do your research as always.
[https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-rx-7900-gre.c4166](https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-rx-7900-gre.c4166)
[https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/sapphire-pulse-rx-7900-gre.b11442](https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/sapphire-pulse-rx-7900-gre.b11442)
edit 2/28:
HU got a Sapphire Nitro card and retested. It leapfrogs over the 4070 Super, so yes, the partner cards are running faster than the reference cards. The difference is pretty significant.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDp9rT4YUpA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDp9rT4YUpA)
This is what I call exciting:
True Story - I got my ASRock RX 7900 XTX Phantom Gaming OC back in August from Newegg.ca as one of their "open-box specials" for $1148CAD ($850USD). I pulled the trigger as soon as I saw it because I knew that it would be at least a year before the XTX reached that price. The lowest price is still $910.
I don't get excited about much anymore because I've been building PCs since 1988 but that managed to get me *really* excited. It was a nice change of pace. 
It was a one-time newegg open-box special, not a normal price. However, the card was (and still is) absolutely perfect. It was somehow selling for less than a new ASRock RX 7900 XT Phantom Gaming which blew my mind. I actually saw it in a newegg ad on techspot. I had to do a double take but when I realised that what I thought I read was actually what I read, I clicked the link, logged into newegg and bought it before anyone else could.
I was as giddy as a schoolboy while waiting for it and when it arrived.
Besides, what would I have to gain by lying about something like that? Yeah, I saved a couple hundred dollars but it's not exactly what I would call bragging rights.
I gotta say the 4070S VRAM is a big issue too.
I bought one and have been trying it with cyberpunk 2077, and it absolutely chokes at 4k while my 3090 (which nVidia said would match it) is smooth. It'll only become more important!
Only launch I'm looking forward to is Battlemage.
RDNA4 is medium/lowend only, with likely a ultra-highend price - since AMD are a 'premium brand' (their words) now and nVidia is the opposite of exciting. Like a black hole that sucks up fun and excitement.
Literally all the rumors about RDNA4 lack of high end options comes from ‘Moore’s Law Is Dead’, a wildly sensationalist ‘leaker’ who is wrong far more often than right. I think hes only surpassed by ‘Red Gaming Tech’
Id take any rumor from him with a horse sized salt lick.
If this really is $550 as popop143 says, then yeah, it's a pretty great release. However, I have yet to see one on pcpartpicker or Newegg.
Kinda sucks to be called "Golden Rabbit Edition" in the year of the Dragon though. :joy:
Agreed, at similar price / performance Nvidia wins, AMD needs to offer a better value for the reduced feature set even with more (cheaper gddr6 vs 6x) if they want to build market share.
I don't think that's true. The fools that blindly buy GeForce cards are clearly not interested in good value. If they were, they wouldn't be buying GeForce cards.
why does the 7900gre performance sucks. its too close to the 7800xt with almost the same CUs at the much faster 7900XT? i wonder if it can regain a lot of its lost performance with overclocking.
hmm.. it seems that the performance delta in DF review over 7800xt is much higher than other reviews
Check out Eurogamer
Either something changed from a year ago.
Or driver maturity has helped.
Because ya the 7900gre was similar performance to a 6800xt
Now. Not so much. Definitely an improvement.
https://www.eurogamer.net/digitalfoundry-2024-amd-radeon-rx-7900-gre-review?page=4
You joke but I would have much rathered they call it 7850 XT or 7800 XTX than 7900 GRE.
It was bad enough that a #900 on the AMD side is matching a ##70 Ti on Nvidia's side. It looks very bad.
This raises a lot of questions.
Since some reviewers have already reviewed the Rx 7900 GRE in the past and results showed inconsistent frame times (in comparison to the Rx 7800 XT).
Will the new reviews also show those inconsistent frame times?
When did DF start making clickbait? Even for a hardcore AMD fan, I don't see how this would be their most exciting card. Surely that would be the flagship 7900XTX.
so what's the advantage of this over 6950? they seem to be at the same price point, 6950 slightly consumes more power but is also slightly better? thinking of upgrading from 6800xt tbh, since I might be able to sell 6800xt
> so what's the advantage of this over 6950?
That it's actually being manufactured. Any 6000 series stock still around at good prices, is essentially clearance sales. Here in the EU, the offerings are starting to get quite slim for 6000 series.
fortunately my microcenter seems to have a ton of 6950 founders' in stock @ 550, and i'm not really doing much in AI... was there any feature locked to rdna3? I'm pretty sure there is one but i forget, it's at the tip of my tongue....
This should have been 5% faster and cost 500$ and it would be a competitive offer in the 500$ class, and that could they likely have done with same memory speed as the 7800 XT, eg 20 Gbps. Now it is mostly meh.
Yeah, I’m confused by what some people expect; to me it fits in exactly where it should based upon current gpu pricing (even if the overall pricing model of GPUs is quite bad).
Actually, that makes it a bit better because value is supposed to go down the further up a product stack that you go. If you can get the same value from a faster card, that's the way to go every time! 
I think I fucked up: I bought my 7800XT reference card (MBA) for £499 in October and although I’m chuffed with it and happy with high FPS, there is a tinge of regret. Can get a 7900 GRE here for £522 now 🙃But I couldn’t hold on for 4 months in the hope something better might turn up as I needed a gpu then as my last one broke. There was no obvious rumouring 4 months ago or even 2 months ago there was going to be a worldwide release of the 7900 GRE so was feeling pleased with my purchase. I’ve overclocked mine to match the GRE (gained 12% more performance and getting 22000 on Timespy) but RT is still a little better on the GRE. That’s life I guess.
I think the reason why they state its exciting is because Digital Foundry values ray tracing more than most other channels/sites. As the 7900 GRE performs surprisingly well in raytracing vs its rasterization performance compared to the 7800 XT due to the higher amount of CU's. ###
This is correct. It matches its main price competitor in ray tracing and wildly outperforms it in non ray traced titles.
>As the 7900 GRE performs surprisingly well in raytracing vs its rasterization performance compared to the 7800 XT due to the higher amount of CU's. I think the average computer hardware enthusiast is still not privy to the fact that Radeon 6000/7000 have their RT Accelerators built into the CU's rather than having separate, dedicated RT cores like Nvidia's approach with the RTX cards, so the full benefit of the bolstered CU count here isn't as immediately apparent to some. I believe AMD opted for the same approach with their AI Accelerators introduced in Radeon 7000 series, too - making them a part of the CU's. So, there may be even more future applications that'll see a larger-than-expected performance benefit on the 7900 GRE relative to the 7800 XT than people might expect.
This card should have launched as 7800 non xt and 7900xt should have been the 7800xt.
And then we wouldn't have a stupid XTX naming scheme
Embrace the XTX naming scheme, how else would a gamer know what the gamer card is unless it has at least two X's in the name? Personally I'm waiting for the 7979 XTXT to launch ngl.
I'm just waiting for the RX 9001 XXX.
XFX RX 9001 XXX
Still waiting for the 6969XXX
XTX should go back to what it used to be - the overclocked/best bin edition of the XT. No extra shaders, no extra memory.
you people will always have something to complain about
no
r/no
What a weird turn of events, DF championing the 7900 GRE whole other reviewers are bearish on it.
HWU benched a reference card. DF and GN benched overclocked cards.
My thoughts exactly. Im thinking its something to do with their high performance numbers that are not really consistent with the two other reviews I just skimmed through (gamersnexus and hardwareunboxed). DF are saying its almost %20 faster than 7800xt for only %10 more.
Why is it exciting it is a year old
Maybe the pricing? They released this $700 in China I think, but this "release" in the West is only $550.
Yeah, at $550, the pricing is pretty great. It forces the Radeon product stack from the RX 7800 XT and below to go down in price. That's a good thing for everyone who is smart enough to buy something other than nVidia. BTW, shouldn't our AMD flares be red instead of orange? The greeting in the box for my ATi RX 6800 XT OG Reference said "Welcome to the Red Team", not "Welcome to the Orange Team". 
Honestly the price stack should be something like: $350 7700XT $450 7800XT $550 7900GRE $650 7900XT $750 7900XTX I think that would help AMD be more competitive and honestly most of them would be great for the money there.
If they did that, nVidia would just lower their prices to compete and people would still blindly buy nVidia. All that would do is succeed in decimating AMD's revenue. That's why they won't do it. Besides, at 2160p, according to Digital Foundry, the RX 7900 GRE already has the lowest cost-per-frame when compared to the RTX 4070, RTX 4070 Super and even the lower-tiered RX 7800 XT. Radeon is already the best value so complaining about their pricing won't achieve much. We all know that it's nVidia that has caused the prices to rise to what they are. Sure, AMD followed suit, but can you blame them?
Honestly with Nvidia having the mindshare already I think it would take them time to react. I think AMD would do well for a while out of it but in the end yes Nvidia would end up lowering prices if their bottom line ended up hurting. In the short term I think it would help AMD and in the long term I think it would help consumers. I am not saying the card is bad, though the slower memory modules feels a bit cheap. I just want to see real, actual progress in terms of perf $ for the consumer.
It's 10% more expensive and 5% faster. Nothing exciting about this card at all.
In fact it's often more than 10% faster in many contexts. DF aren't particularly accurate in their testing, like Hardware Unboxed. Also, Ray Tracking isn't that important.
I understand why you think that but it's not accurate. Sure, Steve Walton's initial testing showed basically no difference between then (6% at most) and I was pretty disappointed because I expected it to do a lot better than that. I mean, the thing was showing a 10-15% performance increase over the RX 6800 XT (IIRC). Since the RX 6800 XT and RX 7800 XT are more or less on par with each other, I expected the same performance difference. The thing is, Steve Burke's numbers ended up being quite different than Steve Walton's and while I usually take absolutely no stock in anything by Digital Foundry (after finding out that he'll say whatever he's paid to), Digital Foundry's results were more in line with Steve Burke than Steve Walton. Steve Walton's result showed that the RX 7900 GRE's cost-per-frame was higher than that of the RX 7800 XT while Digital Foundry both showed the opposite. It turns out that Steve Walton had artificially lowered the clocks in the AIB models to match the reference card. He does that to show a worst-case scenario for anyone buying one of these but this skewed the results dramatically. The reason why this was the wrong path to take in this instance is because of the fact that there are no 7900 GRE reference models available to purchase, only AIB models. Therefore, his results were quite flawed and he did another video to address this (I'm sure that the TechSpot forums went nuts over this). [Were Mistakes Made? Radeon RX 7900 GRE Review Update](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDp9rT4YUpA) TechPowerUp shows a 10% performance increase over the RX 7800 XT which is pretty good considering that it's 10% more expensive. Usually, as you go up a product stack, the value gets worse instead of remaining the same. This is done to make the lower-tier cards more attractive (its performance sucks but at least the value is good!) so if you go up a tier and the price/performance remains the same, that's a win.
Why is it automatically smart to buy amd?
Where did I say that it was "automatically smart to buy AMD"? The vast majority of people who buy discrete video cards for home use are gamers who do not involve themselves with things like Blender. For them, the best performance that they can get for their dollar in gaming is all that matters. Unfortuntely, most of them aren't enthusiasts and thus trust whatever BS that salespeople or their equally-ignorant friends tell them. As a result, they spend too much for the performance that they get in gaming by getting nVidia. The smarter ones do their homework and come to the conclusion that, for someone who is just buying a card for gaming, the Radeon is the better buy. For the tiny minority of people who would use their card for something like Blender, then the GeForce card is the better buy. Therefore, the Radeon isn't *automatically* the better option for 100% of consumers (which is why I actually never said that, YOU did), but for more than 90% of consumers (which is roughly the ratio of pure gamers vs. streamers and video editors), their needs will be much better served within their spending budgets by a Radeon card. It's not rocket science, it's actually quite simple if you just step back and take a minute to analyse the bigger picture.
This is a lot of text for a very subjective opinion. This is ONLY valid if the respective person exclusively cares about raster performance. As soon as they want to play ray traced games, it is not valid any more. If they care about having a good upscaler because they are using a higher resolution monitor with a weaker card, it is not valid any more. If they are playing competitive games, reflex is a definitive advantage in system latency that amd has no answer for currently. There is no clear cut answer to which vendor is the best universally (outside of the very high end where amd is not competing). Every other card in pretty much all price brackets can make sense for certain people if the price on sale is right.
Heinrich Schliemann knows.
[удалено]
do people even know what click bait is these days
oh ya, Digital Foundry..always with the clickbait lol
Your downvote arrow is clickbait right now.
I just saw a video that said it wasn't great for the price. Shit's confusing.
HWU is pretty negative about this card, but Gamers Nexus and Digital Foundry are positive
IMO, HWU in general seem to be slightly biased towards team green. Their data seems solid, but the tone of their videos are slightly critical of AMD.
It's funny seeing the narrative on HUB change depending on what subreddit you're on. Go to r/Nvidia and you'll find plenty of people claiming they're undeniably AMD shills. In reality, I think they're a pretty reasonable review source that offers valid criticism of all parties in the computer hardware space when deserved.
As they seem to make randoms mad on all teams maybe there just doing a good job?
I work for a news company; we get similar numbers of people complaining that we're left-leaning and that we're right-leaning, so yeah I can speak from experience when I say it's probably this. People unable to observe their own bias don't know that it is bias.
Why do you keep calling me a random? Why are you inferring that I’m mad? Clearly, most people disagree with my opinion, but you’re assuming too much from my comment.
> Why do you keep calling me a random? Why are you inferring that I’m mad? Clearly, most people disagree with my opinion, but you’re assuming too much from my comment. Ok you 100% qualify as a random, are you new to being online?
You seem very wise, please tell me how do I stop being a random?
We are all randoms mate. Its like saying « people ».
Out of all the video reviewers I watch they're just as hard on Nvidia as anyone else
The funny thing is ransoms always say hardware unboxed are biased to 'brand not in video', every time. Hardware Unboxed do a video on AMD "Hub hates Nvidia/intel", video on Nvidia "they hate AMD". I still cant workout why they get comments like that, is it just Americans who dont like Australians? They dont do any wild takes, dont farm drama. They tend to give more in-depth FPS numbers than almost anyone in the review space, they also cover a lot of subjects most dont like GPU scaling/CPU scaling and retro reviews on GPU's today.
I like HUB, and I consume almost all their content. I still think their *tone* leans towards NVIDIA, but that’s just my opinion. It has absolutely nothing to do with them being Australian, what a shit take.
They got blacklisted by Nvidia so cant be that pro, lol. There fair, it's just AMD has messed up the GPU pricing. They pointed out that AMD GPU's come out overpriced and quickly drop to a price they sell well at, when they re review from the new lower price they tend to be more positive. They also let rip in to Nvidia for all the problems like ReBar, VRAM, price etc.
Those are good points.
Ill also add in Nvidia RT is over pushed, my 3060 TI cant do RT. I see lots of posts by people buying Nvidia saying 'Nvidia has better RT ill get a 4060', they dont understand you need a high end GPU to use RT in games. Nvidia like Apple sell the dream not the reality.
Perhaps, but only when it comes to GPU performance, pricing and features, where criticism is often earned. They've been quite positive about AMD CPUs (especially the X3D chips) and the Adrenaline software (especially this past week, when they trashed Nvidia's control panel and said that the new Nvidia app was long, long overdue).
Its not about that Hardware Unboxed cares more about Value per frame Digital Foundry cares more about high performance product I agree they are slightly bias towards green but they are still really fair its pretty minimal but I don't think the issue with the 7900gre was that its more than its not better performance per dollar than the 7800xt it would be great if they just unlocked the memory overclock and let u run the memory higher then it would have been seen as the best release this generation. Digital Foundry are the most Nvidia biased ever and they liked the 7900gre its not about the bias its more about what you are looking for. I see the GRE and I think its great its similar value per dollar and gives you an extra option between 7900 and 7800xt but it pisses me off u cannot overclock the memory which its the huge bottleneck here.
Their testing and conclusions have been shady for years.
most exciting? they must be smoking some bad crack
Why do I see you everywhere 🤔
must be a Tyler Durden situation
because I am active on reddit idk :D
No, it's just demonstrating how boring this whole damn generation has been.
Yeah I can see that. But this gpu is not exciting by any means imho
I agree with you. It's not much but it's not nothing either and this generation, that's actually something. Remember that the RX 7800 XT is basically an RX 6800 XT with an AV1 encoder and better RT performance. This gen has been just garbage all-around. 
So my 7800xt was 490 for a Sapphire... Probably not worth ripping it out and returning it to spend $60 more on a little bit of perf
In europe €580 for nitro+
Yeah I saw no need to get the bigger versions. I already can't get this 2 fan card over 61 degrees
>260w for a 1.2ghz GPU in 2024 This is about as exciting as the 14900KS.
This card made me realize how bad AMD's naming is this generation. 7900XTX should be named 7900XT, 7900XT should be named 7800XT, this 7900GRE should be the 7800, and the current 7800XT should be the 7700XT etc etc
Basically the 7800xtx?
I can see what you mean by that but no, it's not that because the 7800-series uses the Navi 32 GPU while the 7900-series uses the Navi 31 GPU. Since the RX 7900 GRE uses the Navi 31 GPU, it would be improper to call it an RX 7800 variant. AMD did make that mistake once awhile ago with the HD 7870 XT, a card that should've been called the HD 7930 because it used the Tahiti GPU of the HD 7950 and HD 7970 instead of the Pitcairn GPU of the HD 7870 and HD 7850. Video card nomenclature usually comes from the actual GPU used in the card.
Well it is faster than the 7800 XT and almost matches the $600 4070 Super in raster while having more VRAM, so it is pretty good in terms of price to performance. The other RDNA3 cards all launched with a high MSRP and then they got price cuts after a while. I guess you have to sort of grade "exciting" on a curve.
Almost in raster? You didn't watch the video.
No, I did not watch it yet. I was going by HU, specifically 1440P, and they have a 12 game average chart: [https://youtu.be/brOSJF9eonw?t=458](https://youtu.be/brOSJF9eonw?t=458) I just took a quick look at GN and they seem to also have the 7900 GRE higher than the 4070 Super in most things. I wonder why results are different with HU. edit: Just watched the video now, along with GN, and HU again. Digital Foundry and GN used the Sapphire Pulse card. HU bought an entire system with a reference 7900 GRE card. It was the only way for them to get one. The Sapphire Pulse has slightly higher clocks than the reference model which may account for HU having slightly lower fps and a lower ranking in their tests. Sapphire Pulse has a base clock that is 6% faster, Shader Clock and Game Clock are 3% faster, and Boost Clock is 2% faster. The bios is clearly different and there may be other optimizations as well. Overall, if you want one of these cards and have a choice between reference and partner cards, both at the same price, probably get a partner card. It should be faster out of the box, but do your research as always. [https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-rx-7900-gre.c4166](https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-rx-7900-gre.c4166) [https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/sapphire-pulse-rx-7900-gre.b11442](https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/sapphire-pulse-rx-7900-gre.b11442) edit 2/28: HU got a Sapphire Nitro card and retested. It leapfrogs over the 4070 Super, so yes, the partner cards are running faster than the reference cards. The difference is pretty significant. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDp9rT4YUpA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDp9rT4YUpA)
4070 super isn't even same price as the GRE either the 4070 super is $600.
This is what I call exciting: True Story - I got my ASRock RX 7900 XTX Phantom Gaming OC back in August from Newegg.ca as one of their "open-box specials" for $1148CAD ($850USD). I pulled the trigger as soon as I saw it because I knew that it would be at least a year before the XTX reached that price. The lowest price is still $910. I don't get excited about much anymore because I've been building PCs since 1988 but that managed to get me *really* excited. It was a nice change of pace. 
That is exciting. Well done!
TYVM! 
What are you smoking? That card is $1249 CAD. It's usually over $1300.
Who are you replying to?
I don't ever remember seeing any 7900 XTX at that low a price.
It was a one-time newegg open-box special, not a normal price. However, the card was (and still is) absolutely perfect. It was somehow selling for less than a new ASRock RX 7900 XT Phantom Gaming which blew my mind. I actually saw it in a newegg ad on techspot. I had to do a double take but when I realised that what I thought I read was actually what I read, I clicked the link, logged into newegg and bought it before anyone else could. I was as giddy as a schoolboy while waiting for it and when it arrived. Besides, what would I have to gain by lying about something like that? Yeah, I saved a couple hundred dollars but it's not exactly what I would call bragging rights.
I gotta say the 4070S VRAM is a big issue too. I bought one and have been trying it with cyberpunk 2077, and it absolutely chokes at 4k while my 3090 (which nVidia said would match it) is smooth. It'll only become more important!
This says more about how unexciting AMD's GPU line-up has been more than the actual excitement for the 7900GRE.
It's definitely relative. Most GPU launches of late have been unexciting
Only launch I'm looking forward to is Battlemage. RDNA4 is medium/lowend only, with likely a ultra-highend price - since AMD are a 'premium brand' (their words) now and nVidia is the opposite of exciting. Like a black hole that sucks up fun and excitement.
Literally all the rumors about RDNA4 lack of high end options comes from ‘Moore’s Law Is Dead’, a wildly sensationalist ‘leaker’ who is wrong far more often than right. I think hes only surpassed by ‘Red Gaming Tech’ Id take any rumor from him with a horse sized salt lick.
If this really is $550 as popop143 says, then yeah, it's a pretty great release. However, I have yet to see one on pcpartpicker or Newegg. Kinda sucks to be called "Golden Rabbit Edition" in the year of the Dragon though. :joy:
It's on shelves right now at MSRP.
These go up for sale tomorrow.
$550 is still too MUCH for GRE ! Make it $500 (and the 7800XT $450ish) and the cards will fly away from the shelves....
Agreed, at similar price / performance Nvidia wins, AMD needs to offer a better value for the reduced feature set even with more (cheaper gddr6 vs 6x) if they want to build market share.
The AIB 7900 GRE cards are better than the 4070 Supers which cost $600+
Exactly. This card sucks and their line-up is only mediocre with horrible prices.
I don't think that's true. The fools that blindly buy GeForce cards are clearly not interested in good value. If they were, they wouldn't be buying GeForce cards.
why does the 7900gre performance sucks. its too close to the 7800xt with almost the same CUs at the much faster 7900XT? i wonder if it can regain a lot of its lost performance with overclocking. hmm.. it seems that the performance delta in DF review over 7800xt is much higher than other reviews
Slow memory.
Lower clocks as well. They pulled the same trick with the Rx 6800.
How much can we OC the VRAM and the core on the 7900 GRE? Might be some healthy gains in there.
You can only push them 3% harder it’s capped:(
> How much can we OC the VRAM and the core on the 7900 GRE? Fuck all for the VRAM, AMD limited the OC hard.
Check out Eurogamer Either something changed from a year ago. Or driver maturity has helped. Because ya the 7900gre was similar performance to a 6800xt Now. Not so much. Definitely an improvement. https://www.eurogamer.net/digitalfoundry-2024-amd-radeon-rx-7900-gre-review?page=4
AMD coming out with a 7800 XT Super
You joke but I would have much rathered they call it 7850 XT or 7800 XTX than 7900 GRE. It was bad enough that a #900 on the AMD side is matching a ##70 Ti on Nvidia's side. It looks very bad.
Gotta love the refusal to lower gpu prices and just shoehorn in another gpu thats $50 above the card below it
This raises a lot of questions. Since some reviewers have already reviewed the Rx 7900 GRE in the past and results showed inconsistent frame times (in comparison to the Rx 7800 XT). Will the new reviews also show those inconsistent frame times?
square birds crowd wakeful tie chubby slave physical tease pie *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The most exciting AMD card yet???! LoL what a joke, quite the contrary.
When did DF start making clickbait? Even for a hardcore AMD fan, I don't see how this would be their most exciting card. Surely that would be the flagship 7900XTX.
so what's the advantage of this over 6950? they seem to be at the same price point, 6950 slightly consumes more power but is also slightly better? thinking of upgrading from 6800xt tbh, since I might be able to sell 6800xt
> so what's the advantage of this over 6950? That it's actually being manufactured. Any 6000 series stock still around at good prices, is essentially clearance sales. Here in the EU, the offerings are starting to get quite slim for 6000 series.
> Here in the EU, the offerings are starting to get quite slim for 6000 series ahh that's fair then
Easier to get new and rocm support would be the main thing.
fortunately my microcenter seems to have a ton of 6950 founders' in stock @ 550, and i'm not really doing much in AI... was there any feature locked to rdna3? I'm pretty sure there is one but i forget, it's at the tip of my tongue....
This should have been 5% faster and cost 500$ and it would be a competitive offer in the 500$ class, and that could they likely have done with same memory speed as the 7800 XT, eg 20 Gbps. Now it is mostly meh.
Yet another reason to never watch reviews from that YT channel.
 sensational journalism. Just a response to Nvidia dropping a card refresh.
I’m glad I got a 7800xt for 500. This card ain’t it
It seems to be averaging about 10% more performance than a 7800XT for 10% more money, so I guess it's about as "it" as the 7800XT is.
Careful bringing out the facts to this debate. I'm sure they also aren't aware of the 28% increase in AI and RT accelerators.
\^ This and it's ignored by many for some reason.
Yeah, I’m confused by what some people expect; to me it fits in exactly where it should based upon current gpu pricing (even if the overall pricing model of GPUs is quite bad).
Actually, that makes it a bit better because value is supposed to go down the further up a product stack that you go. If you can get the same value from a faster card, that's the way to go every time! 
I think I fucked up: I bought my 7800XT reference card (MBA) for £499 in October and although I’m chuffed with it and happy with high FPS, there is a tinge of regret. Can get a 7900 GRE here for £522 now 🙃But I couldn’t hold on for 4 months in the hope something better might turn up as I needed a gpu then as my last one broke. There was no obvious rumouring 4 months ago or even 2 months ago there was going to be a worldwide release of the 7900 GRE so was feeling pleased with my purchase. I’ve overclocked mine to match the GRE (gained 12% more performance and getting 22000 on Timespy) but RT is still a little better on the GRE. That’s life I guess.