I've trimmed the specs table out of the review because it had too many mistakes, sorry I fail you guys on that one. I've updated the table for the written review (www.techspot.com/review/2793-nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-super/). I'm also working on an updated review using the latest vBIOS, it won't change the conclusion of this review, but we want to get you as accurate numbers as possible. Also to be clear this testing took a week, we found out a day before the video was set to go live that there was a vBIOS issue that in some instances reduces performance by up to 5%. Anyway sorry for the screw up on the specs table, that was sloppy :(
Thanks for handling a mistake in the appropriate manner. Acceptance, accountability and resolution. Owning up to and fixing mistakes is why you still have our respect.
Honestly I expected much better from you guys, the review was up for nearly 10 hours before you addressed the issue. But we know how hard and taxing benchmarking is and we thank you for your efforts.
@Folkster1915 just so you know, this video was released at 1am local time. I also pinned a comment at 1am explaining the mistake. I then trimmed the video which takes several hours for UA-cam to process. Once the changes were made I re-created the video index and pinned this comment. We made a mistake, we're sorry about that, we've done our best to rectify the mistake.
People were actually anticipating that? Because just by looking at the specs you could already guess that the difference wouldn't be big between the original Ti and the new Ti SUPER.
Looking at specs there shouldn't be a big difference between 4080 and 4070 TISU, yet 4080 manages more than 20 % diff many times. Maybe specs on the video are wrong? nVidia had specs stating 4070 TISU only has 48 MB cache, which would explain a lot @@jonas_bento
It's even worse when you realise that by die size it should have been a 4060 Ti _at best_ ; they've done a great job at inflating the names _as well as_ inflating the prices. Based on where my £250 GTX 1060 fell compared to consoles when new, it's equivilent to a £600 4070... it's an absolute joke .
@@TotallySlapdash Its totally ridiculous to think the 4060ti should have had the performances of the 3090ti in 1440p. Only actual game performance matters.
@@Ilestun and the 4060ti is shit in actual game performance. I don't think the 4060ti should have been better than the 3090 ti, but it shouldn't have been on par with the 3060ti, hell worse sometimes.
@@M-dv1yj Turing was the actual start of the insanity. Ray tracing gimmick. We can all agree that RT performance of Turing and ampere wasn't acceptable. But fangirls paid 1200+ for 2080ti and 2000$+ for 3090ti.
now imagine i said forget nvidia got a 7900xtx and never looked back :) they made evga leave, 800 dollar 12 gb 4070ti , and wanted to call it 4080 ... FORGET YOU NVIDIA!
well, nvidia does have some extra value, being better stability for some random obscure games usually on old apis, and profesional use with cuda and nvenc being AI or whatever, sooo tecnically there's that going for nvidia, meanwhile amd has.... cheaper price thats it@@JosePineda-jn8jk
This is good news for me. I was planning on upgrading from a 3060ti to this card but decided to renovate my garage loft and rent it out instead. These statistics are making it easy for me to wait and see. Thinking I’m going to switch to amd next
Coming off of amd, honestlyif the driver optimization turns out to make it a bit more faster then when it's tested I'm going to get it for my new PC,tired of amds bullshit driver software consistently crashing
7900 XTX owner here. I'd like to point out that the latest preview drivers boost Alan Wake 2 RT performance considerably. It's still not great but it's now playable at least. Also the AFMF driver level frame generation works great on this game as it's a slower-paced title. I think these improvements are rolling out in the next release driver which is due out this week or the next.
I'm really happy with my 7900xt On 1440p and 4K you can't ask for more without goin for the 4080 or the XTX version. You can play everything on max settings with no problems. The only exceptions are that games with hard Rsytracin implementation... And, obviously, it's not worthy to turn on that thing just to lost 40% of performance.
U'll be paying back your savings as the electricity bill just because of those insane "idle & video playback (youtube, Netflix, VLC)" power consumption figures of 7900 XTs ... AMD needs to solve that power draw at least in "idle & video playback"
@Aluminium-Can 35W seems to be a very Optimistic consumption for a 7900 XT on video playback. That's the figure for a 7700 XT. No, 7900 XT will consume 45-50W+ constant @video playback !
Don't... unless you plan on spending big every other year. I have 3 27" 1440p monitors at home and 3 27" 4K monitors at work, so I switch between the two resolutions 5 days a week. It's simply not worth it.
@@Nintenboy01 Games that use heavy RT are not worth using on nvidia either, let's not pretend like heavy RT doesn't absolutely wreck framerates in nvidia cards too
The most common complaint of the 4070 Ti was it only has 12GB. Interestingly, the 4070 Ti Super having 16GB made very little difference, even at 4K. Probably be a few years down the track before it makes a real difference, and by then, most people will be ready to move on to a new card anyway. The 4070 Super (non Ti) does look like a much better choice.
They did the same for me. The 4070ti aka 4080 12 gb for 800 dollras and only 12 gb vram was A JOKE! I had a 3070ti and wanted a good upgrade for high frame rate 4k gaming. I left nvidia just like evga did, Got a pwoercolor hellhound 7900xtx and I LOVE IT AND NEVER REGRETED IT. AMD for the win! FSR3 is AWESOME in avatar game, i love it!
You don't have to get either. The thing about the 7900 XT is that you are not as likely to use ray tracing with it, in which case... why not get a 7800 XT? That will still run anything extremely well without ray tracing (and can still do light to moderate ray tracing fairly well also, with software ray tracing potentially being a great alternative). Also, obviously pricing in your region could be a significant factor. The 7900 XTX has been on sale for as low as 800 about two weeks ago in the US, and the 7900 XT has actually dropped below 650 on occasion in the US. Personally I wouldn't pay even 700 for the 7900 XT in the US, knowing that it's already been available for less than that.
@@syncmonism I going to aim higher for the fact that i saved up way more than i wanted by hesitating for a long ass time about what to buy... but in my mind 7800xt the sanest option to buy to be honest. Thou maybe 4070s is there too, thou i still do not want a 12gb gpu at this stage.
@@syncmonismcuz me and maybe this guy wans high fps ultra at 1440p with 7900xt thats why. 7800xt is banger for the $ but still 20-30 %weaker than 7900xt
Thanks for the video confirming that Nvidia still expects us to buy ANY sh*t they throw at us and be happy . It'll be fun to see what the 50 series is like and all we have to do is wait about a year for it .
This really is what the 4070 ti should have been, 12GB of vram on a card of that tier was dumb. It is kinda strange though how some of the games BARELY have any performance uplift over the original 4070 ti.
@@CuthaluThis. I have a 4070 Ti, play everything at 4K and never had issues with memory. Was expecting the Ti Super to be a big performance jump and Im just loling seeing these graphs. So much nonsense being spouted everywhere online. Consoles are the limiting factor and they have 16 gbs shared memory, so until the next gen (PS6 etc), 12 gbs of dedicated gpu memory will do just fine.
12GB is OK for this performance tier. Not great, but sufficient enough for this card to not show any singnificant difference at realistic game settings vs cards with bigger buffers. Ti Super was released for those people, who were mumbling that they just need more VRAM for $800. Well, now Nvidia gives them more VRAM, as they asked... No wonder 4070 Super is a better card overall, taking into account it's much lower MSRP.
@@CuthaluExcept that it does need more than 12gb. You're expected to be paying $800, or $900 back when it was the 4080 12gb. I thought it was crazy for Nvidia to announce a $900 GPU with 12gb of VRAM when in the previous generation 8gb was too low and the 6800 had 16gb of the same GDDR6 for $580. Current gen consoles have 16gb of shared memory, so it's ideal to match or exceed that in VRAM due to PC ports usually being not as well optimised and having higher graphics settings.
@@soranamaeApparently modern day 2024 GPU buyers can't fathom the concept that expensive 800$ gpus should have more than sufficient VRAM for current games so they can last more than few years into the future. Pretty much the same stuff 3070 buyers said 3 years ago and they were proven wrong GTX 1070 and Rx580 didnt "require" 8GB vram in 2016, and GTX 1080ti didnt need 11GB in 2017 but it sure as hell made them legendary GPUs that aged extremely well with future games, unlike the 3.5GB GTX 970
You know what's really great about your channel (apart from all the hard work you do by testing etc..)? You're both so calm and chilled out. A really nice contrast to all the shouty American tech channels out there.
lmao same. i got mine back in October for $450 because newegg had a deal going on. i was waiting to get the 7900xt or the 4070ti but im glad i saved money
3-5% faster and 20% off. Nvidia really stuck to their stupid mantra of NEVER officially reduce prices. They'd rather launch a dumbfounded name than do that. They should just have reduced the 4080 to $800, the 4070Ti to $600 and the 4070 to $500, and then released a 4080 Ti with a fully enabled AD-103, and raised the power to 375W, for $1000. People gave AMD flak for a generally clumsy launch with confusing naming and pricing that left some big head-scratchers. But at this point Nvidia has nothing on AMD in that regard.
I'm going with 4070 Super and waiting until 5000 series releases to get into 4K gaming. By then, good mini LED monitors should be released at reasonable prices.
5060 using 128 bit bus and 3gb memory modules 12gb vram, $600 5070 using 196 but bus and 3gb memory modules 18gb vram, $999 5080 using 256 bit bus and 3gb memory modules 24gb vram, $2000 5090 using what ever wit 3gb of memory modules = a lot of vram, $3000 The more you buy, the more you save! 😂😂😂
Been waiting for this one, but after quickly going through it, performance increases are disappointing, but for the same money it’s a little faster and has more VRAM.
I had heard about this refresh slightly after the launch of the 4070. Of course, it was just rumor, but it made sense. I commented on it on a few channels back then. So just the vibe check on it felt about right, so I waited. Now it's here, and it's basically what the rumors said. It's just. Well. Still a bit disappointing, innit? Honestly, at this point, I think I'd rather just wait for the 50 series and instead upgrade my PSU and CPU and save back up for 2025 or whenever.
More than 12GB of VRAM makes no big difference for this class of GPUs (for gamers). And by the time games will use more then 12GB, Ti Super most probably won't be capable to run them at playable framerates anyway, except maybe a few rare titles.
I agree, the specs "should" push this card at bare minimum 10% above the non-super (arguably more like 15%). And we're getting 3%??? I don't see how that's even possible. Something is not working right. Not even a 5% variance for MSI explains this. From specs & clocks alone, I was calling for an 11-16% uplift. 3% is like 1/3 the uplift of my low-end estimate from hardware specs.
@@kathrynck it almost feeling like the driver is not using the extra cuda cores and only using the extra bandwidth wich explain the 4 to % 5% difference
Fantastic job reviewing! Best reviews for PC parts on UA-cam in my opinion. These videos are so informative. This product makes no sense at all to me...unless you only play Alan Wake, Cyberpunk, and Fortnite with heavy RT on. Outside of like 3-4 games with RT...it gets beat across the board by the 7900xt. AMD has better raster, 25% more vram, and minimum of $50 lower price. I mean...you gotta really love lights, shadows, and DLSS to get this. Seems like a poor product just like it's non super variation. AMD was absolutely insane to price the 7900XT at $900 for launch...but at $710 to $750...people are asking Nvidia to steal their money if they still choose a 4070ti super.
Yep, and even if i would consider Nvidia, just checked prices 4070 ti is 999-1050€ (super included), 7900 xt... 889€ but just got to 779€, so no thanks nvidia. 4080 gtx is.... 1400€, what a bad value
This is the only GPU that deserves to be in 70 class with 256 bit bus. This should've been the 4070Ti all along. Edit : I'm diappointed, somehow this peice of sh!t is barely any faster than 4070 ti despite having much higher memory bandwidth and CUDA cores.
Just get a 7900xt xtx or 7800xt, amd figured out the vram and preformance long time ago. Nvidia is just failing with every gpu relase, i expected 4070ti super to outpreform the 7900xt, but it doesnt even match it.
It was expected that it will not beat AMD top dogs, I recently upgraded from 1080 Ti to Nitro+ 7900XT for even cheaper than what 4070 Ti Super would cost me and this even further solidifies my choice...also we will see how long till 16GB and 256 bit bus on 4070 Ti Super will last till it starts experiencing the same problems 3070 Ti experienced with increased VRAM usage in modern games, especially now with UE5 games!
@leonro I hope not because that's what we thought about 8GB just few years ago, and altho it's still functional today..at high or max settings, 1440p or 4k it might start to be a bottleneck for some AAA UE5 titles ( unless they make good optimisations on VRAM usage )
Hehe 1080 gtx owner, strongly eying the 7900xt, just waiting for right price (700 would be perfect since 6950xt was 650€, but that was a luckey deal, no other card was ever discounted that strong from earlier high). 7900 XT is just a 'stronger' card imo, wider bus, more ram, more consistant raster, hogwarts good example of why i trust this card. Performance/watt is not the best, however this is among the best amd has offered yet, better then XTX (slightly), a lot better then 6950 xt, loosing nothing to 7800 xt, and nvidia is basically 45 watt better but 7-10% lower raster. I don't think RDNA will be great (for high end, so 7900xt will age well, maybe with more ram, mainstream suggest 16gb cap for it. And nvidia price oh man, 1400€ is the median for 4080 gtx card, 1050€ for TI super, sorry 7900 xt much better deal.
18:43 - Eventhough it is provided by the speech overlay to the graph, perhaps a graph showing efficiency in terms of power consumption per frame would represent a clearer picture for efficiency? Keep up the good, hard and honest work. Your efforts are much appreciated!
You sound EU enough to know that the 4080 will stay at the same price and the 4080 super will sell for an even higher price and/or be consistently out of stock for months... 😂
@@MattJDylan Yeah. I going to buy something next month but i think its now down to 4080s or 7900xtx now. But I have a feeling the 4080s will be too expensive here for my taste and go with the xtx. But we'll see.
@@Kevlord22 I wouldn't be surprised if amd cuts prices on the xtx (temporarily or permanently) after the 4080s... sad we will hardly see those cuts here in the old continent though 😅
@@Kevlord22I think AMD will cut the price of the 7900xtx but for me when I got mine it was almost 45% cheaper than the 4080, so I do not regret my purchase at all even if they cut prices. I cannot think of a scenario where I would’ve spent the 40%-50% more for the 4080 so I can have better RT performance but worse rasterization performance and less vram. Also in my country the 4090 is 2.5x more than the 7900xtx, I would rather build another computer than spend that much to get the extra 25%-35% performance
@@SettlingAbyss96 Worst thing 4090 gtx isn't even capable to play everything in 4k , high fps + ray tracing. So it's absolete, yet 2500€. This price only makes sense if it currenctly plays everything nice.
I got my 20% difference discount one year ago with my 7900XT, turns out I won the lottery for this generation of graphics card as I bought the champion card at a discounted reasonable price a year ago. It's just been a great experience for me with AMD for the last year with the 5800X3D I bought at the same time (also at a discount), High end gaming at a reasonable price when compared to other configurations.
Oh well, maybe the 4080 super will help drop the prices on the 7900XTX? If not, I feel totally justified on going with the 7900XT, as I originally planned. This was disapointing for the 4070ti Super.
I think if the 4080 super is competitive enough at $999 AMD will drop the 7900XTX in price by $100-$150 and at that price it will probably be the card to get until the next generation launches.
@@SettlingAbyss96 I agree with price to performance of that hypothetical scenario if that were to be the case, but I really would like to play some ray traced titles like Alan wake 2 in all it’s glory, lol. I panic bought a 4080 during Black Friday and decided to stick to my guns and wait for the 4080 super, so I canceled my order. Regardless of the price of the 4080 super, I’ll be getting one. Got my eye on a strix
No point in being envious anyway, you already bought the original card and if you really had buyers remorse and wanted a TI Super you’d still just be better off waiting for the 50 series
Was looking forward to buying this GPU but after seeing that lackluster improvement over the non-super, I'm just going to wait for 5000 series. Really hope we don't get another price increase.
Obviously you're not using this for work, so why even bother with Nvidia? Other than ray tracing, (and in some games DLSS), and that really only applies to the high-end cards, there's really no benefit for the regular gamer to go with Nvidia. If you're waiting for the 5000 series and think that the price is going to be fairer, you don't know Nvidia. I'm not saying that AMD are angels or anything, but there are a couple of good sensible options at a high price, but at least not insultingly high for what they give you. Interestingly, the original price for the 4090 was not that off the line, considering how insanely that thing was built. But every single card going down from that halo product, has been 40% too high, with the super models being generally $200 too high, though I would think that the TI is about $300 too high, given that it's basically giving 16 GB finally. Actually that 16 GB is exactly why I think it's still a problem, no $600 plus card should have anything less than 20 GB... This is Nvidia giving you planned obsolescence in these cards at eye watering prices, they want you to replace your card every 2 years even if you've paid $800 or more
@marcm. Some people really enjoy RT. I'm one of them. Of course, I'm not going to sacrifice other visual quality settings, but I would gladly pay more for good framerate AND good RT. Some prefer the former.
@@marcm. I buy Nvidia cards because of Blender. I'll probably buy 5070 and keep it for a really long time, since I"m pretty much done with Western AAA gaming.
@@marcm. Anything over $700 has no excuse for being incompetent in RT. That argument might hold water in 2018, but not in 2024. Nvidia is charging way too much for tomorrow's hardware, but AMD is making the best GPU that money can buy for 2015. You can hold your nose and buy Nvidia, but you forget about that price within a week. If you buy AMD you have to live with shitty RT, upscaling, and frame gen for the next few years. Even Avatar, that just so happens to be an _AMD sponsored title_ doesn't let you disable RT and it gets curb stomped by Nvidia cards. If a $750 7900xt can't even hit 40fps in Alan Wake II today, how bad is it going to age when even more games opt for RT lighting?
I am glad I went with an all white high end build with the gigabyte aero oc 4090/ 7800x3d/ 64 gigs of ddr5 in the white phanteks nv7. The pc is a beast and I keep the pc clean.
@@xpodx There are already five different graphics cards for 500 or lower with 16GB of vram, one of which is actually made by Nvidia. It's not that crazy. More realistically, a 4070 with 16GB for 600 or 650 (at launch) would have made a lot of sense, though likely they would have had to have lowered it to 600 by now. This also would have meant that the 4070 ti would have also had 16GB from the beginning, and that would have made it a lot more attractive to people at 800, especially a year ago.
Definitely holding onto my 3080 until the 5070 drops (hopefully with 16gb VRAM). Or whatever AMD comes up with around the same price if they improve RT performance enough.
I was hoping for this to be a decent card, but it seems Ngreedia doesn't want customers' money. At this point I'll just get a cheap used 3080 and wait it out till next gen.
If you look enough you can find used 3080’s occasionally for $350 ish. I was able to snag a dell 3080 locally for $300, which is a great deal compared to new ones
On sale, this card actually fit into my price range. I needed a card for my HTPC that runs to my 4k 120hz tv. $250+ bucks cheaper than any 4080 Super I could find, but still getting all the VRAM that I need. It might have been more economical to go with the 4070 super, but I value the extra performance for a little bit extra.
It feels like NVIDIA is really aligning their product line up to AMDs, targeting the performance of the AMD cards at roughly the same price point (7800 XT vs 4070 SUPER, 7900 XT vs 4070 Ti SUPER, 7900 XTX vs 4080 SUPER) with the SUPER refresh. The 4070 SUPER now performs on par with the 7800 XT while drawing a few less watts, but still costs a bit more. The 4070 Ti SUPER comes up a bit short compared to the 7900 XT, and but still costs a bit more. I don't know if DLSS 3 support is worth the price difference.
3080Ti makes the 4070 class as irrelevant. Months ago i watched the ASUS TUF OC version around 600USD. It's better a 7900XT than ALL of the 4070 class chips, then you target a 4080, 4080 super, Ti, etc.
Is there a particular reason not to include the 7900xtx in thece charts? I assume it's going to be there for the 4080super but I was a bit puzzled to see a 4080 in this and not the xtx, I'll admit.
The 7900xt is the standout here. If it was 699 then it would be the automatic buy. As for current pricing I would opt for 4070 Ti Super if I could get it for MSRP over 7900xt just for the raytracing uplift.
I'm also really puzzled by some of the data here. I'm playing Jedi Survivor atm and I'm getting an average FPS of 115 over 23 hours of gameplay at 1440p ultrawide with ray tracing enabled / epic quality on everything with a 5800X3D. That's much higher FPS than Steve is getting here at 1440p. I wish they would test ultrawide instead of 1080p on high end cards cos who buys a high end card to game at 1080p? Also I read the usual comments here about "DLSS blows AMD crappy FSR out of the water, FSR is unusable etc" - but I'm using FSR quality and I literally cannot tell the difference with it on or off in terms of quality but I do get an extra 20fps. I had some mates round the other day and i toggled FSR on and off a few times and asked them which setting looked better and they both said "it looks exactly the same" - they are Xbox players. Add to that the fact that Jedi Survivor is using 18.9GB VRAM on the climb to the observatory and I'm sitting here wondering how the Nvidia fanboys come up with their conclusion that AMD is dead or rubbish. I switched from a 980Ti while trying to play AC Valhalla at 1080p because the game kept crashing to desktop. I picked up a 7900XT for £699 in september with starfield and I haven't had a single issue with any game. Not one. I also agree with Moore's Law is Dead that it's user error in 99% of times if people are having trouble with AMD. Like a read a comment the other day where someone said they will never buy an AMD CPU again because they get BSOD all the time before going on to say that their RAM wasn't EXPO and wasn't on the QVL. I've been delighted with my switch to an AMD GPU. I won't say I'll never go back to Nvidia but they will have to offer some seriously better value products before I even consider it.
I'm upgrading to this card from my old RX 480 to use with Blender and am pleased as punch. You reviewers can sometimes be out of touch and are too quick to call something good or bad value when you look at the current market. Not everyone is a hardware enthusiast and will only upgrade when necessary. For $800, it's the best card for an $800 budget.
Let's see how the 4080 super stacks up first, 7900xtx at $950 won't be as good of a deal compared to 4080 super at $1000, it will drop in price for sure.
@arekb5951 thats the problem for us in Australia. We have the "kangaroo tax" when converter usd to aus we should be paying about $1500 for the 4080 super but it'll be about $2000+ aus compared to 7900xtx that's roughly 1600aus at the moment on sale
Yes please redo this review when you can. I'm considering getting one of these if it performs well and is available for MSRP.. I was going to wait for the RTX 50xx series but this might just be enough to make me part with my money. Cheers!
I really appreciate the fan noise testing. Fan noise is a REALLY big deal to me and many others who dont want their PC sounding like a jet engine when playing games. Made the mistake of getting a PNY 3070 without looking into it, and i cant stand the noise
Been keeping an eye on this stuff to maybe get as an upgrade from 6800xt, and was hoping the ti super would be better. But seeing as it's close to the 7900xt I'd rather just have the extra vram I think since I enjoy modding games.
I had a 6800XT and felt it wasn't performing well. Sold it on Ebay and bought a PNY 4070 locally for $550. Im blown away how good it is. Getting 120fps now without fail, i love it!
Steve, I would love to see a comparison showing the 12 Gb of Vram on the OG 4070 Ti vs the 16 Gb of Vram on the 4070 Ti S. Is 16 Gb of Vram actually needed today or in the next few years?
If AMD can get the base 7900xt cards to stick at the $709 price point, I think that should be enough to make people swing towards the AMD cards, especially people that play mainly competitive FPS games ie COD etc..
I recently upgraded to this card from an RTX 2060 Super. The RTX 4070 Ti Super might not be setting the world alight, but holy shitballs - for me? MASSIVE upgrade.
So, the Super 4070 Super TI Super turned out not to be as super as supposed. After the results of the 4070 Super I have to admit I expected more superness. I'm super worried now about less than super results for the 4080 Super.
lol, fuck no. Trash tier ray tracing at that price is just fuck no... Also vastly inferior upscaling technique which is more and more required as software RT is a thing on base level and it scales insanely with resolution making it no brainer going further. DLSS is easily worth $100 and AMD has no plans about making FSR more on par with DLSS.
@@mroutcast8515 17:26 4070 RT perfomance is trash? Do you kiding? Grab 7900XT level of perfomance card for playing with soapy DLSS instead of native. "Great" idea from brainwashing green fanatic. Nvidia marketers works good.
I think that's a really good way to determine whether DLSS/FSR should be tested: does it hit a target FPS without it? If not, turn on DLSS/FSR. 60 FPS seems like the most reasonable target right now.
The actual 4070 is finally released. Not just 60-class cards with a fake name. The lies from Nvidia are stacked so high the name has to be 4070 Ti Super.
If I were in the market for a new GPU at the moment, I would buy the 7900XT over this out of pure spite. As many have said, this is what the 4070TI should have been, and I would add that the MSRP should have been 700USD.
It doesn't even have to be out of spite, the benchmarks clearly showed us that the 7900XT is better in basically everything, just the conclusion is way off.
@@MrJonas7 From memory, HUB did say the 7900XT is better in rasterisation, but that the 4070TI S is a convincing winner in raytracing and up-scaling, which is basically true. The issue is that not everyone likes upscaling, which the TI Super needs to run demanding titles well. Like the original TI, it's not a truly viable raytracing card.
@@Skotty64081 It was also for me when I bought a 6800XT 6 months ago. I really hope people at Nvidia (and AMD to be fair) read some of these comment sections.
What price cuts?? If you mean from AMD 7900XT, you can forget about it. I think with these tests showing 4070ti clearly inferior to 7900XT and XTX, they can double down on their current prices and not budge and will sell more. We already know Nvidia won’t be lowering a thing lol😊
@@Patrick-tw7nr I agree with you, I just hope when the 4080S comes out 7900XTX lowers in price which hopefully pushes the prices on the 7900XT, but as it stands AMD does not have to do anything right now. We need Intel to up their game lol
With ultra wide and super ultra wide being pretty popular the last couple years, I think it would be a good addition to start adding 3440x1440 and 5120x1440 to the benchmarks.
@@whiteofsoulNo, 3440x1440 goes beyond 4K (it's 6K resolution), 5120x1440 is 7K resolution. No graphics card can drive properly those ultrawides with the exception of the 4090 (at least for 3440x1440).
![Best GPUs / Graphics Cards for Gaming in NOVEMBER 2024! [1080p,1440p & 4K]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kj-ebp3lirU/mqdefault.jpg)
![Best GPUs / Graphics Cards for Gaming in NOVEMBER 2024! [1080p,1440p & 4K]](/img/tr.png)
I've trimmed the specs table out of the review because it had too many mistakes, sorry I fail you guys on that one. I've updated the table for the written review (www.techspot.com/review/2793-nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-super/). I'm also working on an updated review using the latest vBIOS, it won't change the conclusion of this review, but we want to get you as accurate numbers as possible. Also to be clear this testing took a week, we found out a day before the video was set to go live that there was a vBIOS issue that in some instances reduces performance by up to 5%.
Anyway sorry for the screw up on the specs table, that was sloppy :(
We forgive you.
Be well mate. @@eli72481
Thanks for handling a mistake in the appropriate manner. Acceptance, accountability and resolution.
Owning up to and fixing mistakes is why you still have our respect.
Honestly I expected much better from you guys, the review was up for nearly 10 hours before you addressed the issue. But we know how hard and taxing benchmarking is and we thank you for your efforts.
@Folkster1915 just so you know, this video was released at 1am local time. I also pinned a comment at 1am explaining the mistake. I then trimmed the video which takes several hours for UA-cam to process. Once the changes were made I re-created the video index and pinned this comment. We made a mistake, we're sorry about that, we've done our best to rectify the mistake.
Not as close to the 4080 as everyone was anticipating.
@@Hugs288 read his comment again and look at the video title...
Wait for the next software updates
People were actually anticipating that? Because just by looking at the specs you could already guess that the difference wouldn't be big between the original Ti and the new Ti SUPER.
Looking at specs there shouldn't be a big difference between 4080 and 4070 TISU, yet 4080 manages more than 20 % diff many times. Maybe specs on the video are wrong? nVidia had specs stating 4070 TISU only has 48 MB cache, which would explain a lot @@jonas_bento
This is such a lame duck GPU, waste of time imo. Barely worth the money at half that price!
Remember when Nvidia tried to sell the 4070ti as a 4080. It's crazy to think with the disparity between the two cards.
It's even worse when you realise that by die size it should have been a 4060 Ti _at best_ ; they've done a great job at inflating the names _as well as_ inflating the prices.
Based on where my £250 GTX 1060 fell compared to consoles when new, it's equivilent to a £600 4070... it's an absolute joke .
4070Ti Super. FML. Imma gonna sit this round out. nVidia is too stupid and AMD is only selling me an expensive efficiency boost for my 6800XT.
@@TotallySlapdash Its totally ridiculous to think the 4060ti should have had the performances of the 3090ti in 1440p. Only actual game performance matters.
@@Ilestun and the 4060ti is shit in actual game performance. I don't think the 4060ti should have been better than the 3090 ti, but it shouldn't have been on par with the 3060ti, hell worse sometimes.
@@Coliflower185 Agreed the 4060ti should have been the 4070 and the 4070 should have been the the 70 super and so on
it's still wild that the cheapest 256-bit bus current gen card from team green goblin is $800
ben upselling the mid range since the GTX680.
@@_M....when they started their pricing shift
@@M-dv1yj Turing was the actual start of the insanity. Ray tracing gimmick. We can all agree that RT performance of Turing and ampere wasn't acceptable. But fangirls paid 1200+ for 2080ti and 2000$+ for 3090ti.
They should have added 16gb to the 4070 super
@@Pixel_FX no it was the 600 series with the shift in die size with pricing. Seems your brain is on error there 😂
Now imagine that nvidia wanted to call 4070ti "4080 12GB" and charge 900$/1100€ (yes 1100€ initially with vat) for it
Yea lmao, the unlaunch of the 12gb was the funniest sh/t of the 4000 launch
now imagine i said forget nvidia got a 7900xtx and never looked back :) they made evga leave, 800 dollar 12 gb 4070ti , and wanted to call it 4080 ... FORGET YOU NVIDIA!
@@FrostyBud777but the brand loyalty is strong with these people 😂
@@FrostyBud777 Same. Went 7900xt and haven't looked back.
well, nvidia does have some extra value, being better stability for some random obscure games usually on old apis, and profesional use with cuda and nvenc being AI or whatever, sooo tecnically there's that going for nvidia, meanwhile amd has.... cheaper price thats it@@JosePineda-jn8jk
The fact that it still couldn’t dominate the 7900XT is a big L in my opinion.
It destroys the 7900 in power efficiency, DLSS, Ray Tracing, and as all the AMD fanboys claim: just wait for those future driver updates
No one cares about RT…in rasterization it doesn’t destroy anything
@srobeck77 FSR is good enough and RT is more or less similar and pretty useless. Dude, don't be a fan boy
@@srobeck77That's simply not worth over the $100 extra. Especially with lower Vram
@@srobeck77For 800 dollars? Better stick to a 7900. Nvidia is the gift that keeps on giving.
This needed to be lot faster, more closer to the 80 and 7900xt.
Nvidia are set to releasing the driver updates soon
This is good news for me. I was planning on upgrading from a 3060ti to this card but decided to renovate my garage loft and rent it out instead.
These statistics are making it easy for me to wait and see. Thinking I’m going to switch to amd next
Coming off of amd, honestlyif the driver optimization turns out to make it a bit more faster then when it's tested I'm going to get it for my new PC,tired of amds bullshit driver software consistently crashing
@@TheRealNeoFrancois In my experience with AMD, the only time my driver crashes is if I OC too aggressively. What are you doing when the crash occurs?
@frankdevo5715 i did switch camps, went from a 3060ti to a 7800xt. It s a best buy in my opinion.
This guy does more benching than Schwarzenegger in his prime. Also I love how NVIDIA said that your unit was a dud, terrified of the HWUB power
THey're all duds this card SUCKS pure and simple. Nvidia should be ashamed of it! Need to price it closer to £350/$400 max cuz it's a PIG.
hahaha true 😂
7900 XTX owner here. I'd like to point out that the latest preview drivers boost Alan Wake 2 RT performance considerably. It's still not great but it's now playable at least. Also the AFMF driver level frame generation works great on this game as it's a slower-paced title. I think these improvements are rolling out in the next release driver which is due out this week or the next.
The boost is bigger at 1080p and no one should be using that GPU at that res. And the retest by another you tuber doesn't show a huge increase.
@@MrNelahemwhat YT? I wanna see what they have on it.
I have tried AFMF on my Rx 6800, and it is bad. A stuttery mess.
Tsk that's too late people moved on already.
lol what is too late and who moved on?@@VatchGaming
This just made the 7900xt look better in my mind
Yeah, still happy with the 7900xt I've been playing on since September with the starfield bundle.
@@jjbankertPlus you had months of playtime so it was definitely worth it
I'm really happy with my 7900xt
On 1440p and 4K you can't ask for more without goin for the 4080 or the XTX version.
You can play everything on max settings with no problems. The only exceptions are that games with hard Rsytracin implementation... And, obviously, it's not worthy to turn on that thing just to lost 40% of performance.
@@jjbankertsame here :)
That was my take away too.
I just bought a 7900 XT for $690. That price puts it solidly at $5.43 per frame. Very good value card!
Absolutely! I'll get one myself once I have the money, this benchmark data just showed the 7900xt is worth it IMO
Where?
@@yeagmaticSweden. Price corrected for currency and taxes on the day of purchase as I needed to know if it was worth it before buying :).
U'll be paying back your savings as the electricity bill just because of those insane "idle & video playback (youtube, Netflix, VLC)" power consumption figures of 7900 XTs ...
AMD needs to solve that power draw at least in "idle & video playback"
@Aluminium-Can 35W seems to be a very Optimistic consumption for a 7900 XT on video playback. That's the figure for a 7700 XT.
No, 7900 XT will consume 45-50W+ constant @video playback !
I'm surprised by the performance of the 7900 XT. AMD has worked well on the drivers lately. I was most interested in the 4k resolution.
Yeah it was matching the 6950xt on release. Now it really pulling away from that card at over 15% uplift in performance in some games
Don't... unless you plan on spending big every other year. I have 3 27" 1440p monitors at home and 3 27" 4K monitors at work, so I switch between the two resolutions 5 days a week. It's simply not worth it.
it's just nowhere near as good in games that use heavy RT. Also it consumes 50-70W more depending on the game versus the 4070 Ti Super
@@Nintenboy01 Games that use heavy RT are not worth using on nvidia either, let's not pretend like heavy RT doesn't absolutely wreck framerates in nvidia cards too
@@miha1999grobar yeah in most cases path tracing isn't worth it. It's ok in games like Spider-Man, Ratchet and Frontiers of Pandora
Just a few generations ago, a graphics card with the 2nd largest die (and cut down) on a 256 bit bus was a $400-$500.
The lowest an ××80 class gpu ever got was 550 for the gtx 980
@shnacksonall the more reason why they should be cheaper they’ve been building and rehashing these nodes forever.
@shnacksonbros defending a billion dollar company 💀🤓
@@thewinner4x873naming doesnt have to reflect reality
yes, yes we know Grandapa now got take your pills
The most common complaint of the 4070 Ti was it only has 12GB. Interestingly, the 4070 Ti Super having 16GB made very little difference, even at 4K. Probably be a few years down the track before it makes a real difference, and by then, most people will be ready to move on to a new card anyway.
The 4070 Super (non Ti) does look like a much better choice.
The 4070 ti (non-super) is a better deal than 4070 super (non-Ti)
Nvidia finally did it. Pushed me over to the other side, sad I'm not getting the 4070 Ti Super we were expecting, but looking forward to my new 7900XT
They did the same for me. The 4070ti aka 4080 12 gb for 800 dollras and only 12 gb vram was A JOKE! I had a 3070ti and wanted a good upgrade for high frame rate 4k gaming. I left nvidia just like evga did, Got a pwoercolor hellhound 7900xtx and I LOVE IT AND NEVER REGRETED IT. AMD for the win! FSR3 is AWESOME in avatar game, i love it!
You don't have to get either. The thing about the 7900 XT is that you are not as likely to use ray tracing with it, in which case... why not get a 7800 XT? That will still run anything extremely well without ray tracing (and can still do light to moderate ray tracing fairly well also, with software ray tracing potentially being a great alternative). Also, obviously pricing in your region could be a significant factor. The 7900 XTX has been on sale for as low as 800 about two weeks ago in the US, and the 7900 XT has actually dropped below 650 on occasion in the US. Personally I wouldn't pay even 700 for the 7900 XT in the US, knowing that it's already been available for less than that.
@@syncmonism I going to aim higher for the fact that i saved up way more than i wanted by hesitating for a long ass time about what to buy... but in my mind 7800xt the sanest option to buy to be honest. Thou maybe 4070s is there too, thou i still do not want a 12gb gpu at this stage.
@@syncmonismcuz me and maybe this guy wans high fps ultra at 1440p with 7900xt thats why. 7800xt is banger for the $ but still 20-30 %weaker than 7900xt
@@xCDF-pt8kj Yeah I'm going to wait for RX 8000 as well and see how that goes.
Thanks for the video confirming that Nvidia still expects us to buy ANY sh*t they throw at us and be happy . It'll be fun to see what the 50 series is like and all we have to do is wait about a year for it .
This really is what the 4070 ti should have been, 12GB of vram on a card of that tier was dumb. It is kinda strange though how some of the games BARELY have any performance uplift over the original 4070 ti.
If anything this goes to show 4070 Ti doesn't need more than 12 GB. The card isn't fast enough to utilize anything more, same seems to apply to TISU.
@@CuthaluThis. I have a 4070 Ti, play everything at 4K and never had issues with memory. Was expecting the Ti Super to be a big performance jump and Im just loling seeing these graphs. So much nonsense being spouted everywhere online. Consoles are the limiting factor and they have 16 gbs shared memory, so until the next gen (PS6 etc), 12 gbs of dedicated gpu memory will do just fine.
12GB is OK for this performance tier. Not great, but sufficient enough for this card to not show any singnificant difference at realistic game settings vs cards with bigger buffers. Ti Super was released for those people, who were mumbling that they just need more VRAM for $800. Well, now Nvidia gives them more VRAM, as they asked...
No wonder 4070 Super is a better card overall, taking into account it's much lower MSRP.
@@CuthaluExcept that it does need more than 12gb. You're expected to be paying $800, or $900 back when it was the 4080 12gb. I thought it was crazy for Nvidia to announce a $900 GPU with 12gb of VRAM when in the previous generation 8gb was too low and the 6800 had 16gb of the same GDDR6 for $580. Current gen consoles have 16gb of shared memory, so it's ideal to match or exceed that in VRAM due to PC ports usually being not as well optimised and having higher graphics settings.
@@soranamaeApparently modern day 2024 GPU buyers can't fathom the concept that expensive 800$ gpus should have more than sufficient VRAM for current games so they can last more than few years into the future. Pretty much the same stuff 3070 buyers said 3 years ago and they were proven wrong
GTX 1070 and Rx580 didnt "require" 8GB vram in 2016, and GTX 1080ti didnt need 11GB in 2017 but it sure as hell made them legendary GPUs that aged extremely well with future games, unlike the 3.5GB GTX 970
Got my 7900XT for $630 last summer. So glad I grabbed that when I did. Definitely sad that price to performance still hasn’t changed all that much
That was a very good deal! :O
That deal is aging nicely. Can’t believe they got that low. Wish I had pulled the trigger then.
Wow great deal
What a deal 👍...and with that amount of VRAM you'll still be happy in years, not like gRidia owners 😁😐
Just bought a 4080 last December during Boxing Day. I think I made the right decision not waiting for the 4070 Ti Super.
You know what's really great about your channel (apart from all the hard work you do by testing etc..)? You're both so calm and chilled out. A really nice contrast to all the shouty American tech channels out there.
Can't wait for the 2080 Super next week!
That came out 5 yrs ago
At this point 5:45
😂😂@@Worgen4ik
I was wondering if he said it deliberately 😂
I heard that too 😂
This makes me feel really good about getting a 7800 XT for just $450.
:O
Best bang for your buck in the enthusiast class, by a metric mile. Everything past it is just diminishing returns, hype and bragging rights.
yeah i got a 7800XT, not gonna say it's the best option out there but I'm happy with it
lmao same. i got mine back in October for $450 because newegg had a deal going on. i was waiting to get the 7900xt or the 4070ti but im glad i saved money
if u have a 7800xt what makes you feel the need to upgrade to a 7900xt or a 4070ti? wouldn't you want to wait till next gen of gpus?@@jako997
5:47 I can't wait for RTX 2080 SUPER to be reviewed
3-5% faster and 20% off. Nvidia really stuck to their stupid mantra of NEVER officially reduce prices. They'd rather launch a dumbfounded name than do that. They should just have reduced the 4080 to $800, the 4070Ti to $600 and the 4070 to $500, and then released a 4080 Ti with a fully enabled AD-103, and raised the power to 375W, for $1000.
People gave AMD flak for a generally clumsy launch with confusing naming and pricing that left some big head-scratchers. But at this point Nvidia has nothing on AMD in that regard.
Yeah, I had to rewind that to make sure I heard it correctly.
I'm going with 4070 Super and waiting until 5000 series releases to get into 4K gaming. By then, good mini LED monitors should be released at reasonable prices.
According to official Nvidia specs the card uses 21 Gbps memory (672 GB/s) and only has 48MB L2$ not 64MB
okay that explains a lot
No wonder loll
I was wondering about this.
That means that a 3080Ti still has more memory bandwidth.
@@saricubra2867 The 3080ti already has more bandwidth than even the 4080. That thing's a beast at 912.4 GB/s. Only the 3090s and 4090 have more.
Thanks for the honest and accurate review Steve. It's amazing reading the comments defending nvidia on this one, at $800.
Gonna wait for the 5000 series. Hopefully we get a mid-range GPU with at least 16GB of VRAM.
There should be no more $500+ USD discrete GPUs with less than 16GB of VRAM, come 2025...and $800 USD is your new mid-range.
@@Brent_P Knowing Nividia, they still try to push 8GB GPU's in 2025.
5060 using 128 bit bus and 3gb memory modules 12gb vram, $600
5070 using 196 but bus and 3gb memory modules 18gb vram, $999
5080 using 256 bit bus and 3gb memory modules 24gb vram, $2000
5090 using what ever wit 3gb of memory modules = a lot of vram, $3000
The more you buy, the more you save!
😂😂😂
@DeadPhoenix86DP The new entry-level discrete card will soon be $500+ USD, so unlikely.
Hopefully Intel succeeds with Battlemage
This makes the 4070 super more attractive in terms of price to performance.
And locally the 4070 super is making the 4070 ti look a better deal since its only $50 cheaper
This card makes the 4070 Super a GREAT value for the money deal tbh
yep
This was the best video i could find..fantastic details right down to the fan speed of the 2 AIB models, love it.
3 months later and I have zero regret buying this card ❤
I picked up an XFX Merc310 7900xt from Newegg yesterday for $710. I don’t use ray tracing so it seemed a great deal.
Amazing card at a fair price. If you're in 1440p you've got a long time before next purchase.
Been waiting for this one, but after quickly going through it, performance increases are disappointing, but for the same money it’s a little faster and has more VRAM.
I had heard about this refresh slightly after the launch of the 4070. Of course, it was just rumor, but it made sense. I commented on it on a few channels back then. So just the vibe check on it felt about right, so I waited. Now it's here, and it's basically what the rumors said. It's just. Well. Still a bit disappointing, innit? Honestly, at this point, I think I'd rather just wait for the 50 series and instead upgrade my PSU and CPU and save back up for 2025 or whenever.
Which makes it still a massively cut down, low quality mid range GPU for 800. Long after Adas release. Basically nothing, absolutely nothing of note.
More than 12GB of VRAM makes no big difference for this class of GPUs (for gamers). And by the time games will use more then 12GB, Ti Super most probably won't be capable to run them at playable framerates anyway, except maybe a few rare titles.
@@fVNzOthis isn't a mid range GPU, stop acting like a weirdo. Lol
@@stangamer1151bruh there's games today that push past 12GB VRAM at 1440p.
Lmao the stroke comment is too true
Something doesn't seem right. The specs don't scale anywhere near how you'd expect them to, even considering the potential MSI issue.
It definitely needed more power
yeah, might be some fault in the testing. Should be like 8% better, disregarding vram capped games.
@@vshadedoesn't really need more power as the boost clocks are as good as the normal 407ti , i think it's a driver issue
I agree, the specs "should" push this card at bare minimum 10% above the non-super (arguably more like 15%).
And we're getting 3%??? I don't see how that's even possible.
Something is not working right. Not even a 5% variance for MSI explains this.
From specs & clocks alone, I was calling for an 11-16% uplift. 3% is like 1/3 the uplift of my low-end estimate from hardware specs.
@@kathrynck it almost feeling like the driver is not using the extra cuda cores and only using the extra bandwidth wich explain the 4 to % 5% difference
Fantastic job reviewing! Best reviews for PC parts on UA-cam in my opinion. These videos are so informative.
This product makes no sense at all to me...unless you only play Alan Wake, Cyberpunk, and Fortnite with heavy RT on. Outside of like 3-4 games with RT...it gets beat across the board by the 7900xt. AMD has better raster, 25% more vram, and minimum of $50 lower price. I mean...you gotta really love lights, shadows, and DLSS to get this. Seems like a poor product just like it's non super variation.
AMD was absolutely insane to price the 7900XT at $900 for launch...but at $710 to $750...people are asking Nvidia to steal their money if they still choose a 4070ti super.
Yep, and even if i would consider Nvidia, just checked prices 4070 ti is 999-1050€ (super included), 7900 xt... 889€ but just got to 779€, so no thanks nvidia. 4080 gtx is.... 1400€, what a bad value
This is the only GPU that deserves to be in 70 class with 256 bit bus. This should've been the 4070Ti all along.
Edit : I'm diappointed, somehow this peice of sh!t is barely any faster than 4070 ti despite having much higher memory bandwidth and CUDA cores.
yep this is how the 4070ti should had been...Wish mine was.
What are CUDE cores?
It’s gotta be driver issues
Just get a 7900xt xtx or 7800xt, amd figured out the vram and preformance long time ago. Nvidia is just failing with every gpu relase, i expected 4070ti super to outpreform the 7900xt, but it doesnt even match it.
@@maxzoRHDAMD is selling you a "high end" GPU that can't actually run high end features (RT), that is why we have the crazy prices we have
I don't comment very often, but it has to be said : Thank you for your precious work 🙏
It was expected that it will not beat AMD top dogs, I recently upgraded from 1080 Ti to Nitro+ 7900XT for even cheaper than what 4070 Ti Super would cost me and this even further solidifies my choice...also we will see how long till 16GB and 256 bit bus on 4070 Ti Super will last till it starts experiencing the same problems 3070 Ti experienced with increased VRAM usage in modern games, especially now with UE5 games!
I don't think 16gb will see nearly the same issues in the near future, considering that consoles currently peak at 16gb of shared ram.
@leonro I hope not because that's what we thought about 8GB just few years ago, and altho it's still functional today..at high or max settings, 1440p or 4k it might start to be a bottleneck for some AAA UE5 titles ( unless they make good optimisations on VRAM usage )
Hehe 1080 gtx owner, strongly eying the 7900xt, just waiting for right price (700 would be perfect since 6950xt was 650€, but that was a luckey deal, no other card was ever discounted that strong from earlier high). 7900 XT is just a 'stronger' card imo, wider bus, more ram, more consistant raster, hogwarts good example of why i trust this card. Performance/watt is not the best, however this is among the best amd has offered yet, better then XTX (slightly), a lot better then 6950 xt, loosing nothing to 7800 xt, and nvidia is basically 45 watt better but 7-10% lower raster. I don't think RDNA will be great (for high end, so 7900xt will age well, maybe with more ram, mainstream suggest 16gb cap for it. And nvidia price oh man, 1400€ is the median for 4080 gtx card, 1050€ for TI super, sorry 7900 xt much better deal.
Awesome review from the God of Benchmarking @Steve. Still really happy with the 4070 you suggested i get
I feel like the XTX would have been good to see in the list, considering it's quite a bit less money than the 4080. I realize why the 4080 is there.
18:43 - Eventhough it is provided by the speech overlay to the graph, perhaps a graph showing efficiency in terms of power consumption per frame would represent a clearer picture for efficiency? Keep up the good, hard and honest work. Your efforts are much appreciated!
Before the release of the super series - in my country - the cheapest 7900xtx was 400 dollars cheaper than the cheapest 4080.
You sound EU enough to know that the 4080 will stay at the same price and the 4080 super will sell for an even higher price and/or be consistently out of stock for months... 😂
@@MattJDylan Yeah. I going to buy something next month but i think its now down to 4080s or 7900xtx now. But I have a feeling the 4080s will be too expensive here for my taste and go with the xtx. But we'll see.
@@Kevlord22 I wouldn't be surprised if amd cuts prices on the xtx (temporarily or permanently) after the 4080s... sad we will hardly see those cuts here in the old continent though 😅
@@Kevlord22I think AMD will cut the price of the 7900xtx but for me when I got mine it was almost 45% cheaper than the 4080, so I do not regret my purchase at all even if they cut prices. I cannot think of a scenario where I would’ve spent the 40%-50% more for the 4080 so I can have better RT performance but worse rasterization performance and less vram. Also in my country the 4090 is 2.5x more than the 7900xtx, I would rather build another computer than spend that much to get the extra 25%-35% performance
@@SettlingAbyss96 Worst thing 4090 gtx isn't even capable to play everything in 4k , high fps + ray tracing. So it's absolete, yet 2500€. This price only makes sense if it currenctly plays everything nice.
I got my 20% difference discount one year ago with my 7900XT, turns out I won the lottery for this generation of graphics card as I bought the champion card at a discounted reasonable price a year ago. It's just been a great experience for me with AMD for the last year with the 5800X3D I bought at the same time (also at a discount), High end gaming at a reasonable price when compared to other configurations.
The Sapphire 7900 XT pulse is 709.99 with a coupon on Amazon US im pretty sure the 7900 XT is gonna stay around 729.99 it's been that low constantly
Ordered my Phantom Gaming 7900XT with Pandora yesterday for $710 and LMBO!!
Oh well, maybe the 4080 super will help drop the prices on the 7900XTX? If not, I feel totally justified on going with the 7900XT, as I originally planned. This was disapointing for the 4070ti Super.
What's wrong with the 7800 XT?
@@syncmonismit’s not the 7900xt
@@syncmonism7800xt and 7900xtx is a very big difference
I think if the 4080 super is competitive enough at $999 AMD will drop the 7900XTX in price by $100-$150 and at that price it will probably be the card to get until the next generation launches.
@@SettlingAbyss96 I agree with price to performance of that hypothetical scenario if that were to be the case, but I really would like to play some ray traced titles like Alan wake 2 in all it’s glory, lol. I panic bought a 4080 during Black Friday and decided to stick to my guns and wait for the 4080 super, so I canceled my order. Regardless of the price of the 4080 super, I’ll be getting one. Got my eye on a strix
Congratz to 1 Million Subs!
Great review, as always. As a og 4070ti owner, I'm happy 😂. I wonder if the extra 4gb will prove useful a couple years down. the road.
No point in being envious anyway, you already bought the original card and if you really had buyers remorse and wanted a TI Super you’d still just be better off waiting for the 50 series
Why after a couple of years? My MMO game already consumes 13-15GB depending on the location.
@@whiteofsoul care to elaborate a little, what games and where, how many players etc
Some games allocate all free vram, even when they really need less. So prob it could work with 12gb too, or even 8gb@@whiteofsoul
I can feel my throat getting swollen in solidarity, feel better Steve!
Was looking forward to buying this GPU but after seeing that lackluster improvement over the non-super, I'm just going to wait for 5000 series. Really hope we don't get another price increase.
Obviously you're not using this for work, so why even bother with Nvidia? Other than ray tracing, (and in some games DLSS), and that really only applies to the high-end cards, there's really no benefit for the regular gamer to go with Nvidia. If you're waiting for the 5000 series and think that the price is going to be fairer, you don't know Nvidia. I'm not saying that AMD are angels or anything, but there are a couple of good sensible options at a high price, but at least not insultingly high for what they give you. Interestingly, the original price for the 4090 was not that off the line, considering how insanely that thing was built. But every single card going down from that halo product, has been 40% too high, with the super models being generally $200 too high, though I would think that the TI is about $300 too high, given that it's basically giving 16 GB finally. Actually that 16 GB is exactly why I think it's still a problem, no $600 plus card should have anything less than 20 GB... This is Nvidia giving you planned obsolescence in these cards at eye watering prices, they want you to replace your card every 2 years even if you've paid $800 or more
@marcm. Some people really enjoy RT. I'm one of them. Of course, I'm not going to sacrifice other visual quality settings, but I would gladly pay more for good framerate AND good RT. Some prefer the former.
@@marcm. I buy Nvidia cards because of Blender. I'll probably buy 5070 and keep it for a really long time, since I"m pretty much done with Western AAA gaming.
@@marcm. Anything over $700 has no excuse for being incompetent in RT. That argument might hold water in 2018, but not in 2024. Nvidia is charging way too much for tomorrow's hardware, but AMD is making the best GPU that money can buy for 2015. You can hold your nose and buy Nvidia, but you forget about that price within a week. If you buy AMD you have to live with shitty RT, upscaling, and frame gen for the next few years.
Even Avatar, that just so happens to be an _AMD sponsored title_ doesn't let you disable RT and it gets curb stomped by Nvidia cards. If a $750 7900xt can't even hit 40fps in Alan Wake II today, how bad is it going to age when even more games opt for RT lighting?
I am glad I went with an all white high end build with the gigabyte aero oc 4090/ 7800x3d/ 64 gigs of ddr5 in the white phanteks nv7. The pc is a beast and I keep the pc clean.
This should have been the RTX 4070 with 16 GB of vram and launched at $500.
Faster than 3090 for 500? You high?
@@xpodx The 3090 was overpriced anyway when it came out. Are you high?
Mate a 3070 was also faster / same perf as a 2080Ti @@xpodx
@AngelicRequiemX says you. You try making a gpu. Billions of dollars to create it. We should be great full we get the power and price that they are.
@@xpodx There are already five different graphics cards for 500 or lower with 16GB of vram, one of which is actually made by Nvidia. It's not that crazy. More realistically, a 4070 with 16GB for 600 or 650 (at launch) would have made a lot of sense, though likely they would have had to have lowered it to 600 by now. This also would have meant that the 4070 ti would have also had 16GB from the beginning, and that would have made it a lot more attractive to people at 800, especially a year ago.
Thanks for adding the older cards like 2070 and 2060 along with it. Gives a more comparison review for the people who are still using older gen cards
Definitely holding onto my 3080 until the 5070 drops (hopefully with 16gb VRAM). Or whatever AMD comes up with around the same price if they improve RT performance enough.
7:00 it's because higher vram in this game will have more vram allocation and possibly more draw distance
I was hoping for this to be a decent card, but it seems Ngreedia doesn't want customers' money. At this point I'll just get a cheap used 3080 and wait it out till next gen.
If you look enough you can find used 3080’s occasionally for $350 ish.
I was able to snag a dell 3080 locally for $300, which is a great deal compared to new ones
On sale, this card actually fit into my price range. I needed a card for my HTPC that runs to my 4k 120hz tv. $250+ bucks cheaper than any 4080 Super I could find, but still getting all the VRAM that I need. It might have been more economical to go with the 4070 super, but I value the extra performance for a little bit extra.
It feels like NVIDIA is really aligning their product line up to AMDs, targeting the performance of the AMD cards at roughly the same price point (7800 XT vs 4070 SUPER, 7900 XT vs 4070 Ti SUPER, 7900 XTX vs 4080 SUPER) with the SUPER refresh. The 4070 SUPER now performs on par with the 7800 XT while drawing a few less watts, but still costs a bit more. The 4070 Ti SUPER comes up a bit short compared to the 7900 XT, and but still costs a bit more. I don't know if DLSS 3 support is worth the price difference.
AMD cards have 4Gb vram more anyway and 7900XT recieved price drop before 4070 Ti Super release.
3080Ti makes the 4070 class as irrelevant. Months ago i watched the ASUS TUF OC version around 600USD.
It's better a 7900XT than ALL of the 4070 class chips, then you target a 4080, 4080 super, Ti, etc.
FSR3 being open source seems to make it much more widespread than DLSS3 and it never really was worse, I mean the framegen.
Oh nice and RTX 2080 Super review in 2024, was just looking for a fresh view on the card. Thanks Steve!
4070 TI owner got mine in August 23' and I have no FOMO thankfully!
Oh Holy, I just noticed the 1 Mil subs. Congratulations!
Why dont you include 7900XTX in your graphs? Its cheaper than the 4080
Simply aussi masters! keep those HQ (WITHOUT 3 TIMES IN BUILT IN ADS from an perticular other channel) coming!
AMD has a new driver for Alan Wake 2 which improves native + RT Performance for AMD Cards up to 40%!!!
Is there a particular reason not to include the 7900xtx in thece charts? I assume it's going to be there for the 4080super but I was a bit puzzled to see a 4080 in this and not the xtx, I'll admit.
It's to make the super next to the 4080 in these benchmarks...No other reason put the 4080 without the 7900 XtX
holdin out for the Ultra Ti Super X refresh for that sweet extra 4% perf bump, but thx for the great review!
The 7900xt is the standout here. If it was 699 then it would be the automatic buy. As for current pricing I would opt for 4070 Ti Super if I could get it for MSRP over 7900xt just for the raytracing uplift.
Yeah but it’s not. It wouldn’t be any better if a value if both were 50 less
It shouldve been 699$ to begin with.
The 6950XT was the real standout.
I'm also really puzzled by some of the data here. I'm playing Jedi Survivor atm and I'm getting an average FPS of 115 over 23 hours of gameplay at 1440p ultrawide with ray tracing enabled / epic quality on everything with a 5800X3D. That's much higher FPS than Steve is getting here at 1440p. I wish they would test ultrawide instead of 1080p on high end cards cos who buys a high end card to game at 1080p? Also I read the usual comments here about "DLSS blows AMD crappy FSR out of the water, FSR is unusable etc" - but I'm using FSR quality and I literally cannot tell the difference with it on or off in terms of quality but I do get an extra 20fps. I had some mates round the other day and i toggled FSR on and off a few times and asked them which setting looked better and they both said "it looks exactly the same" - they are Xbox players. Add to that the fact that Jedi Survivor is using 18.9GB VRAM on the climb to the observatory and I'm sitting here wondering how the Nvidia fanboys come up with their conclusion that AMD is dead or rubbish. I switched from a 980Ti while trying to play AC Valhalla at 1080p because the game kept crashing to desktop. I picked up a 7900XT for £699 in september with starfield and I haven't had a single issue with any game. Not one. I also agree with Moore's Law is Dead that it's user error in 99% of times if people are having trouble with AMD. Like a read a comment the other day where someone said they will never buy an AMD CPU again because they get BSOD all the time before going on to say that their RAM wasn't EXPO and wasn't on the QVL. I've been delighted with my switch to an AMD GPU. I won't say I'll never go back to Nvidia but they will have to offer some seriously better value products before I even consider it.
Belgium: 4070 ti super 1050 €, 7900xt 779€ (even including Asus TUF model for amd card). Nvidia makes no sense.
I'm looking forward to your RTX 2080 super review next week!
For 4070 Ti Super to be closer to 4080 they should also increase it's power to 300-320 watts.
Yeah, it looks power limited to me
thanks for Power Usage! It is so rare info, but you give it to me
Wait, the 7900 XT is 10% faster 4k raster but you consider that "similar raster performance"?
yeah youll need to tone down the rt unfortunately, it certainly cant handle nvidias rt
I'm upgrading to this card from my old RX 480 to use with Blender and am pleased as punch.
You reviewers can sometimes be out of touch and are too quick to call something good or bad value when you look at the current market. Not everyone is a hardware enthusiast and will only upgrade when necessary. For $800, it's the best card for an $800 budget.
Sounds like the 7900xtx is the way to go?
no dlss and potential driver issues, but sure
@@Gen_66What potential driver issues? Also FSR exists (yeah it's not as good but it's something).
Depends on what you value most on a card
Let's see how the 4080 super stacks up first, 7900xtx at $950 won't be as good of a deal compared to 4080 super at $1000, it will drop in price for sure.
@arekb5951 thats the problem for us in Australia. We have the "kangaroo tax" when converter usd to aus we should be paying about $1500 for the 4080 super but it'll be about $2000+ aus compared to 7900xtx that's roughly 1600aus at the moment on sale
Yes please redo this review when you can. I'm considering getting one of these if it performs well and is available for MSRP..
I was going to wait for the RTX 50xx series but this might just be enough to make me part with my money. Cheers!
I am sad that the 7900xtx wasn't in the graphs. It is only 150 dollars more expensive....
And a lot cheaper than the 4080 that did get included. Definitely feel we could have left out a 4060/3070/6700 variant instead.
I really appreciate the fan noise testing.
Fan noise is a REALLY big deal to me and many others who dont want their PC sounding like a jet engine when playing games. Made the mistake of getting a PNY 3070 without looking into it, and i cant stand the noise
Been keeping an eye on this stuff to maybe get as an upgrade from 6800xt, and was hoping the ti super would be better. But seeing as it's close to the 7900xt I'd rather just have the extra vram I think since I enjoy modding games.
I had a 6800XT and felt it wasn't performing well. Sold it on Ebay and bought a PNY 4070 locally for $550. Im blown away how good it is. Getting 120fps now without fail, i love it!
Steve, I would love to see a comparison showing the 12 Gb of Vram on the OG 4070 Ti vs the 16 Gb of Vram on the 4070 Ti S. Is 16 Gb of Vram actually needed today or in the next few years?
Hogwarts at full settings 4K is using up to more than 12GB so do some predictions.
@@BleedForTheWorld yeah but that game is not very well optimized either to be honest
Great video! Would like to see 6950xt raytracing performance in those charts 😊
If AMD can get the base 7900xt cards to stick at the $709 price point, I think that should be enough to make people swing towards the AMD cards, especially people that play mainly competitive FPS games ie COD etc..
I recently upgraded to this card from an RTX 2060 Super. The RTX 4070 Ti Super might not be setting the world alight, but holy shitballs - for me? MASSIVE upgrade.
Show me the store where it cost 800$ !!!
Thank you for your dedication in testing.
So, the Super 4070 Super TI Super turned out not to be as super as supposed. After the results of the 4070 Super I have to admit I expected more superness. I'm super worried now about less than super results for the 4080 Super.
couldn't agree more with you final thoughts, they should've been releasing this as their actual 4070ti in the first place instead of being the "super"
7900 XT looks to be the better buy.
Can't wait for that upcoming 2080 Super review next week :)
7900XT looks as an amazing deal :)
lol, fuck no. Trash tier ray tracing at that price is just fuck no... Also vastly inferior upscaling technique which is more and more required as software RT is a thing on base level and it scales insanely with resolution making it no brainer going further. DLSS is easily worth $100 and AMD has no plans about making FSR more on par with DLSS.
@@mroutcast8515 I’m only interested on 4k, so I wont use RTX :)
@@mroutcast8515 17:26 4070 RT perfomance is trash? Do you kiding? Grab 7900XT level of perfomance card for playing with soapy DLSS instead of native. "Great" idea from brainwashing green fanatic. Nvidia marketers works good.
@@Protector1rk look at performance in native in games like Alan Wake 2, and AAA UE5 games, lmao.
@@mroutcast8515 found the graphics snob preferring "slightly" better lighting instead of high fps/refresh
Agree with Steve the TUF gaming cards are easily the best looking cards outhere along with the FE models from both companies ...
I think that's a really good way to determine whether DLSS/FSR should be tested: does it hit a target FPS without it? If not, turn on DLSS/FSR. 60 FPS seems like the most reasonable target right now.
Congrats on the 1M subs!
The actual 4070 is finally released. Not just 60-class cards with a fake name. The lies from Nvidia are stacked so high the name has to be 4070 Ti Super.
Only goes to vindicate my choice of the 7900XT... Beast of a card purchased for less than £700 (on offer)...
If I were in the market for a new GPU at the moment, I would buy the 7900XT over this out of pure spite. As many have said, this is what the 4070TI should have been, and I would add that the MSRP should have been 700USD.
This is a regular 4070 in sane years...
Spite was a contributing factor when I went with a 7800 XT a couple of months ago.
It doesn't even have to be out of spite, the benchmarks clearly showed us that the 7900XT is better in basically everything, just the conclusion is way off.
@@MrJonas7 From memory, HUB did say the 7900XT is better in rasterisation, but that the 4070TI S is a convincing winner in raytracing and up-scaling, which is basically true. The issue is that not everyone likes upscaling, which the TI Super needs to run demanding titles well. Like the original TI, it's not a truly viable raytracing card.
@@Skotty64081 It was also for me when I bought a 6800XT 6 months ago. I really hope people at Nvidia (and AMD to be fair) read some of these comment sections.
That is a very good bench + in deep analysis. Thanks! I'm waiting for the RTX 5080.
*Yeah nothing special, 7900XT looks really good, hopefully more price cuts are coming!*
What price cuts?? If you mean from AMD 7900XT, you can forget about it. I think with these tests showing 4070ti clearly inferior to 7900XT and XTX, they can double down on their current prices and not budge and will sell more. We already know Nvidia won’t be lowering a thing lol😊
The problem is.. 4070 ti super is so bad, that AMD does not need to drop prices…
@@Patrick-tw7nr I agree with you, I just hope when the 4080S comes out 7900XTX lowers in price which hopefully pushes the prices on the 7900XT, but as it stands AMD does not have to do anything right now. We need Intel to up their game lol
@@haukionkannel Yep :(
I got the RTX4080 at $200 discount, and for someone who really enjoys raytracing and 4k60, I'm a somewhat happy buyer.
With ultra wide and super ultra wide being pretty popular the last couple years, I think it would be a good addition to start adding 3440x1440 and 5120x1440 to the benchmarks.
Doesn't make sense. 3440x1440 is almost halfway between 1440p and 2160p. 5120x1440 is almost 2160p.
@@whiteofsoulNo, 3440x1440 goes beyond 4K (it's 6K resolution), 5120x1440 is 7K resolution.
No graphics card can drive properly those ultrawides with the exception of the 4090 (at least for 3440x1440).
As an ultrawide user myself(3440x1440) I agree to this.
@@saricubra2867 ah, that's not accurate. Samsung Neo G9 which is 5120x1440 with a 4080 and run just about everything
@@ItzTheDay 5120x1440 is 7.4 megapixels (almost 2 times 4K). The 4090 struggles with Alan Wake 2 at 4K even with AI stuff at least for +60fps.