We're keeping an eye out for the lowest-priced GPUs during the Amazon Prime Day 2026 event, and keeping those listed here for you. The sad state of the memory industry, which is besieged by insanely large memory orders for AI data centers and AI GPUs, has led to increasing prices for gaming graphics cards. Nvidia is purportedly allocating memory based on the amount of money it can make per GB of VRAM, which has made the situation dire for some models. To help you navigate the pricing crisis, we have compiled this GPU index to monitor the availability and pricing of recent graphics card releases from the current and previous generations.

We update this guide constantly with the best prices in the U.S. for each SKU of GPU from the most recent two generations of Nvidia, AMD, and Intel cards. We're listing the lowest price for an available graphics card, regardless of the manufacturer, so it could be an Asus, Zotac, MSI, Sapphire, Gigabyte, Powercolor, or ASRock-branded card, but it will be the cheapest.

A word of warning, with this list, sometimes the retailers switch to third-party sellers automatically. You must be super vigilant and check sellers to ensure legitimacy. For older generation graphics cards, it can often be difficult to find these cards brand-new and on sale from first-party retailers like Amazon, Newegg, and Best Buy, and they are more often than not listed by third parties. Check prices against the current generation of GPUs to understand if you are getting a good deal, or if you're in fact better off paying a little extra for the very latest graphics cards.

Also, check out our list of the best graphics cards and our GPU benchmark hierarchy to see evergreen performance data to help you make an informed decision when choosing a new GPU for your system.

Nvidia RTX 50-Series: Lowest Graphics Cards Prices

The latest 50-series graphics cards from Nvidia include the current most powerful consumer GPU - Nvidia's GeForce RTX 5090. The RTX 5090 uses the new Blackwell architecture and comes with a massive 32GB of GDDR7 VRAM, and given the current prioritization for models with lower amounts of VRAM to boost profits, it's a problem getting your hands on one at anything even in the vicinity of a reasonable price. We are tracking all the best GPU deals in the run-up to Amazon Prime Day 2026.

The 50-series range doesn't have the most impressive gen-on-gen performance uplifts on pure rasterization power compared to the 40-series, but it does support new software and tech such as 5th Gen Tensor cores, 4th Gen Ray Tracing cores, DLSS 4.5 with Multi-Frame Generation tech, and Reflex 2. Some of those technologies, like DLSS and frame gen, can help wring the most performance out of those lower-tier cards with less VRAM.

There are 8GB variants of the RTX 5060 and 5060 Ti, available at near MSRP prices, with the higher-tier GPUs like the RTX 5070 Ti and RTX 5080 in poor supply at any reasonable price.

Nvidia RTX 40-Series: Lowest Graphics Cards Prices

Nvidia's 40-series Ada Lovelace architecture graphics cards include the powerful GeForce RTX 4090 and 4080 Super. The 4090 combines a massive 24GB of GDDR6X VRAM and Nvidia's 4th generation of Tensor cores for increased ray-tracing ability.

The RTX 40-series cards also feature support for Nvidia's DLSS 3 software for AI frame generation, which helps to increase frame rates on higher resolutions and settings. In general, Nvidia cards are the best choice for ray tracing, with more features than the competition. You'll also generally pay more for Nvidia GPUs relative to similarly performing AMD GPUs.

Unfortunately, RTX 40-series GPUs are no longer being produced, so stock levels have dried up on many card variants. Any available cards for sale have a high chance of being either second-hand or ex-mining hardware, yet still ask for exorbitant prices. Be extra vigilant when shopping for 40-series graphics cards, and buy from a reputable seller. Prices for 40-series cards are also much higher than they should be. They can be a good choice for a second-hand purchase if you can get one at the right price and accept all associated risks.

AMD Radeon RX 9000-Series: Lowest Graphics Cards Prices

AMD's competition to Nvidia includes the Radeon RX 9060, RX 9070, and RX 9070 XT graphics cards with MSRP prices of $269, $549, and $599, respectively. Finding one of these GPUs for that price, however, could prove to be a struggle as prices of Radeon graphics cards rise due to ever-expanding memory price hikes. These new cards go toe-to-toe with Nvidia's RTX 5070 and RTX 5070 Ti and offer a great alternative to Team Green.

The RX 9070 XT comes with 16GB of GDDR6 VRAM for those texture-heavy games and provides a large generational increase compared to RDNA 3. Improvements to AI and ray tracing tech have made this generation of AMD cards perform much better in games with ray tracing, but they still fall behind Nvidia in overall performance for ray/path tracing.

There are also 8GB and 16GB versions of the RX 9060 XT available, and they are selling for a fair price at the moment. However, 8GB of VRAM means the card isn't terribly futureproofed, as game requirements continually grow regarding shader and texture memory requirements.

AMD Radeon RX 7000-Series: Lowest Graphics Cards Prices

AMD's 7000-series GPUs are still a great option for a graphics card in your gaming rig if you can find one at a good price. Not the best choice if you're looking for pure ray-tracing performance, but if you want raw computational performance, they are a winner. Combined with AMD's FSR software, these 7000-series GPUs can still crank out high frame rates in the latest games.

The RX 7900 XTX in particular represents a great blend of power and performance, with it being the halo-tier card from the 7000-series and AMD not replicating a super-high-end card for the 9000-series. The RX 7900 XTX still ranks highly in our GPU Benchmark Hierarchy charts.

Here are all the lowest prices for the 7000-series models currently available.

Intel Arc GPUs: Lowest Graphics Card Prices

Intel's entry into the GPU market has been a little hit-and-miss. In some titles, these cards perform relatively well, but in older DirectX games, the cards suffer from some poor performance issues.

Frequent driver updates have made many improvements to the performance of Intel's Arc lineup and turned them into a much more viable choice for a budget gaming PC build. The prices of these GPUs have hit a price sweet spot that has been abandoned by Nvidia and AMD, especially for 1080p gaming. The Arc series of GPUs should certainly not be discounted when considering any budget gaming system build.

Intel's most recent launches include the Arc B580 and Arc B570, with the cards having 12GB of VRAM for the B580 and 10GB for the B570. Pricing is very competitive with the Intel cards, but the manufacturer's variety is limited, as is stock.

More Prime Day Tech Deals

Best Tech and PC deals | Best gaming PC deals | Best RAM combo deals | Best 3D printer deals | Best RAM deals | Best gaming laptop deals | Best monitor deals | Best Wi-Fi Router deals | Best GPU deals | Best SSD deals | Best hard drive HDD deals | Best CPU deals | Best gaming chair deals | Best PC building tool deals | Best PC peripherals deals | Best filament and resin deals | Best motherboard deals | Best CPU cooler deals | Best PC case deals | Best Dell and Alienware deals | Best USB charger deals | Best gaming and productivity laptop deals under $1,000 | Best laptop PC deals

Also, you can join the Tom's Hardware deals Discord for up-to-the-minute hardware deals.

Rumors of a successor to Intel's Arc A770 discrete GPU have been floating around for more than a year at this point, with a new launch window finally seeming on the horizon. Following various leaks, the Arc B770, has just appeared on an undisclosed Intel GitHub repository, with code specifically mentioning "b770." While this isn't an official confirmation, it's easy to connect the dots and see the B770 is closer than ever.

Arc B770 will be part of Intel's second-gen discrete GPU architecture known as "Battlemage," using Xe2 cores, which was supposed to be a lot more ambitious at one point, but the plans seem to have dwindled. Right now, Intel has moved on to Xe3 cores in its Panther Lake mobile chips, though that's still classified as Battlemage (and not Celestial).

Anyhow, prior leaks have revealed some of the specs we can expect in the B770, including the large BMG-G31 die it uses, featuring 32 Xe2 cores. That's a big jump from the 20 Xe cores found on the last-gen A770. The GPU will also feature at least 16GB of GDDR6 VRAM saturated across a 256-bit wide bus. While some rumors point toward more than 16, it's highly unlikely now given the DRAM shortage the industry has plunged into.

The card will compete with AMD's RX 9060-class and Nvidia's RTX 5060-class offerings, with a reported TGP of up to 300W. There's no info on clock speeds, but we know it will be fabricated using TSMC's N5 process, since that's what other Battlemage GPUs use. Intel has also made strides with its driver suite since the last time we saw a B-series card be revealed, which was the B570 at CES 2025, one year ago.

In the past few months, the company has launched workstation-grade offerings under the Xe2 family: Arc Pro B50 and B60, but we haven't seen any new gaming GPUs. On the software side, there are rumors about an in-house multi-frame generation tech in the works at Intel, which could coincide with the launch of the Arc B770.

The timing makes sense since CES 2026 is set to open its doors in just two days - and Intel has a conference scheduled. The arrival of Arc B770 will lend some much-needed competition to Nvidia and AMD in the midrange GPU segment. Of course, it needs to be priced right, but given Intel's track record with Alchemist, it's not unreasonable to get your hopes up.

Even though it's among the best graphics cards, Intel has announced End of Life status for the Arc A750 Limited Edition graphics card. The Arc A750 won't be leaving the stage by itself: Intel's mobile Arc A series lineup is also following suit.

Intel discontinued the Arc A770 Limited Edition graphics card two years prior. This discontinuation pertains explicitly to Intel's version, whereas custom Arc A770 graphics cards remain unaffected. The same situation applies to the Arc A750. As noted by hardware sleuth momomo_us, Intel's Product Change Notification (PCN) documents 856991 and 856777 outline the discontinuation of the boxed version (21P02J00BAR and 21P02J00BA) of the Arc A750, which is to say, the Arc A750 Limited Edition.

The Arc A750 Limited Edition launched in October 2022, so it hasn't even been on the retail market for three years, yet Intel is discontinuing it. This decision isn't entirely surprising, considering that the Arc A770 Limited Edition debuted alongside the Arc A750 Limited Edition but was discontinued after less than a year.

Retailers may continue to place orders for the Arc A750 Limited Edition (21P02J00BAR and 21P02J00BA) until June 30 and June 27, respectively. Intel anticipates that the final graphics card shipments will be dispatched by September 30 and September 26, respectively. As such, it's just a matter of time before the Arc A750 Limited Edition is no longer available on retailers' shelves.

Intel announced the chipmaker's new Arc Pro B50 and Arc Pro B60 at Computex 2025. Maxsun has stitched two of the latter models to produce the Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual 48G Turbo, a dual-GPU solution that provides 48GB of GDDR6 memory designed to address the most challenging AI workloads.

Dual-GPU graphics cards were once popular, but technological advances have made them obsolete. The last consumer-grade dual-GPU graphics card from Nvidia was likely the GeForce GTX Titan Z from 2014, while AMD's was the Radeon Pro Duo from 2016. This means it's been quite a while since chipmakers introduced a dual-GPU product for retail. Although the Arc Pro B60 may not revive the trend, it remains noteworthy since Intel's first foray into the dual-GPU market. Then again, it's an AI graphics card, not a gaming one.

The Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual 48G Turbo essentially combines two Arc Pro B60 graphics cards on one board. It utilizes dual Battlemage BMG-G21 silicon, each accompanied by its own memory. The same silicon powers the Arc B580 but offers double the memory compared to the gaming counterpart.

The GPU inside the Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual 48G Turbo operates according to Intel's reference specifications. It doesn't feature factory overclocks or anything of that sort. Therefore, we're looking at 20 Xe cores, 20 RT units, 160 XMX and 160 Xe vector engines, and a 2,400 MHz clock speed.

Maxsun Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual 48G Turbo Specifications

The Arc Pro B60 has 24GB of GDDR6 memory clocked at 19 GBps—the 192-bit memory interface results in a memory bandwidth of up to 456 GB/s. The biggest selling point is that the Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual 48G Turbo has 48GB of total memory, 50% more than the GeForce RTX 5090 and matching that of the RTX Pro 5000 Blackwell or the Radeon Pro W7900.

With 48GB on one Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual 48G Turbo, users can have multiple graphics cards in a single system to scale the capacity. For example, Intel had a system with two, totaling 96GB, on display. With the correct motherboard, you can easily have four installed for 192GB, akin to Project Battlematrix.

The Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual 48G Turbo is designed to fit into a standard PCIe 5.0 x16 expansion slot; however, there is a catch. Each Arc Pro B60 interacts with your system independently through a bifurcated PCIe 5.0 x8 interface. Thus, it's important to note that the motherboard must support PCIe bifurcation for the PCIe 5.0 slot hosting the Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual 48G Turbo.

Intel has announced its Arc Pro B-series of graphics cards at Computex 2025 in Taipei, Taiwan, with a heavy focus on AI workstation inference performance boosted by segment-leading amounts of VRAM. The Intel Arc Pro B50, a compact card that's designed for graphics workstations, has 16GB of VRAM and will retail for $299, while the larger Intel Arc Pro B60 for AI inference workstations slots in with a copious 24GB of VRAM. While the B60 is designed for powerful 'Project Battlematrix' AI workstations sold as full systems ranging from $5,000 to $10,000, it will carry a roughly $500 per-unit price tag. 

Intel has focused on leveraging the third-party GPU ecosystem to develop its Arc Pro cards, in contrast to its competitors, who tend to release their own-branded cards for the professional segment. That includes partners like Maxsun, which has developed a dual-GPU card based on the B60 GPU. Other partners include ASRock, Sparkle, GUNNR, Senao, Lanner, and Onix. 

Both the B50 and B60 GPUs are now being sampled to Intel partners, as evidenced by a robust display of partner cards and full systems on display, and will arrive on the market in the third quarter of 2025. Intel will initially launch the cards with a reduced software featureset, but will add support for features like SRIOV, VDI, and manageability software in the fourth quarter of the year. 

The Intel Arc Pro B50 has a compact dual-slot design for slim and small-form-factor graphics workstations. It has a 70W total board power (TBP) rating and does not have external power connectors. The GPU wields 16 Xe cores and 128 XMX engines that deliver up to 170 peak TOPS, all fed by 16GB of VRAM that delivers 224 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The card also sports a PCIe 5.0 x8 interface, which Intel credits with speeding transfers from system memory, ultimately delivering 10 to 20% more performance in some scenarios. 

The B50's 16GB of memory outweighs its primary competitors in this segment, which typically come armed with 6 or 8GB of memory. The card also has certified drivers that Intel claims deliver up to 2.6X more performance than the baseline gaming drivers. 

Intel shared a slew of benchmarks against the competing Nvidia RTX A1000 8GB and the previous-gen A50 6GB, but as with all vendor-provided benchmarks, take them with a grain of salt (we included the test notes at the end of the article). In graphics workloads, Intel claims up to a 3.4X advantage over its previous-gen A50, and solid gains across the board against the RTX A1000. It sports similar advantages in a spate of AI inference benchmarks. 

The Intel Arc Pro B60 has 20 Xe cores and 160 XMX engines fed by 24GB of memory that delivers 456 GB/s of bandwidth. The card delivers 197 peak TOPS and fits into a 120 to 200W TBP envelope. This card also comes with a PCIe 5.0 x8 interface.

Intel supports multiple B60 GPUs on a single board, as evidenced by Maxsun's GPU,  with software support in Linux for splitting workloads across both GPUs (each GPU interfaces with the host on its own bifurcated PCIe 5.0 x8 connection). 

Intel's benchmarks again highlighted the advantages of the B60's 24GB of memory vs the competing RTX 200 Ada 16GB and RTX 5060Ti 16GB GPUs, claiming this can impart gains of up to 2.7X over the competition in various AI models. Intel also highlighted the advantages of higher memory capacity in model size, context, and concurrency scaling.

The Intel Arc Pro B60 will primarily come in pre-built inference workstations ranging from $5,000 to $10,000, dubbed Project Battlematrix. The goal is to combine hardware and software to create one cohesive workstation solution. However, the per-unit cost will be in the range of $500 per GPU, depending on the specific model.

Project Battlematrix workstations, powered by Xeon processors, will come with up to eight GPUs, 192GB of total VRAM, and support up to 70B+ parameter models. 

Intel is working to deliver a validated full-stack containerized Linux solution that includes everything needed to deploy a system, including drivers, libraries, tools, and frameworks, that's all performance optimized, allowing customers to hit the ground running with a simple install process. Intel will roll out the new containers in phases as its initiative matures. 

Intel also shared a roadmap of the coming major milestones. The company is currently in the enablement phase, with ISV certification and the first container deployments coming in Q3, eventually progressing to SRIOV, VDI, and manageability software deployment in Q4. 

Intel's partners had multiple Project Battlematrix systems up and running live workloads in the showroom, highlighting that development is already well underway. 

One demo included a system running the full 675B parameter Deepseek model entirely on a single eight-GPU system, with 256 experts running on the CPU and the most frequently used experts running on the GPU. 

Other demos included running and finding bugs in code, an open enterprise platform for building RAGs quickly, and a RAG orchestration demo, among others. 

As noted above, the Intel Arc Pro B50 and Intel Arc Pro B60 will arrive on the market in the third quarter of 2025.

While Intel is gearing up to reveal new Battlemage products at Computex in a few days, X user Haze has shared an image of an Intel ARCade machine featuring a last-generation Alchemist A7 series GPU. Often seen as Intel marketing material for major e-sports events, this machine was reportedly found out of commission and unused at an unnamed Intel campus.

Intel was enthusiastic in the months leading up to the Alchemist launch, as evident in its marketing push for the product. This ranged from custom 60-foot air-conditioned gaming trucks to smaller Arcade machines, like the one we're seeing today. Following the delays associated with Alchemist and inevitable teething problems, Intel has maintained a relatively low profile with Arc since then. The desktop Battlemage launch is proof of this.

The ARCade is an Intel-powered arcade-style machine that has been a recurring presence at events like DreamHack. The controller layout depicts a two-player configuration for fighting games like Street Fighter and Tekken. A quick look inside reveals a GPU at its core, which carries a strong visual resemblance to Intel's Limited Edition models from the Alchemist range, likely the A770. The GPU is presumably housed in an Intel NUC 12 Extreme, but any guess is as good as ours.

It seems that the software divisions at AMD and Intel are setting the stage for their next-generation GPU offerings. The internal codenames for these GPUs, Intel's Xe4 and AMD's GFX13, have been spotted by Kepler and x86isdeadandback at X, as noted by VideoCardz. While this does not allude to the specifications, it shows that both teams are actively pouring resources into the development of their future graphics products.

Intel officially confirmed its fourth-generation Arc GPUs would be codenamed Druid, employing the Xe4 architecture, a while back. The firm has been notably quiet regarding its future GPU roadmap following Alchemist. With limited pre-launch hype, the desktop launch of Battlemage (Xe2) last December was also somewhat of a surprise. That being said, the successor to Battlemage, codenamed Celestial (Xe3), will arrive with Intel's Panther Lake CPUs, which are scheduled for HVM (High Volume Manufacturing) later this year.

Based on employee reports, Celestial has reportedly reached pre-silicon validation, where hardware design flaws are identified and resolved before committing to manufacturing. Tom Peterson's comments support this, stating Celestial's hardware is "baked", with software optimization the remaining task. He also added that the hardware teams have moved on to the next project, Druid (Xe4). Based on commits to the Dawn repository, developers are starting to integrate support for Xe4, which should fall under Intel's Gen15 umbrella.

An AIB is reportedly preparing a dual-GPU variant of Intel's rumored Arc B580 24GB, totalling 48GB of VRAM on a single board, via VideoCardz. According to the source, this model is slated to be revealed at Computex 2025, which is just days away at this point. Specific details like the AIB, interconnect technology, and price are in the dark, but we can expect more details at the trade show, if the rumors are true.

This is the third leak that references a 24GB edition of the Arc B580, following EEC filings from Maxsun and an earlier slip-up from Sparkle. It's quite surprising that a GPU that's supposed to rival the RTX 4060 is getting a 24GB memory configuration. Many PCs don't even possess that much system memory. These cards are intended as a cost-effective solution for AI/ML developers, where similar capacity cards from AMD and Nvidia carry a steeper price tag. The most affordable Blackwell GPU with 24GB of memory is the RTX Pro 4000, costing over $1,500 based on preliminary listings.

An AIB is apparently doubling down on this approach by building a dual-GPU solution, housing two of these rumored 24GB B580 GPUs on a single PCB. Keep in mind, this product is reportedly a one-time design from the AIB, not a standard reference model from Intel.

Traditionally, multi-GPU setups nowadays, like Nvidia's B200 and Apple's M1 Ultra, rely on their own advanced interconnect solutions like NVLink and UltraFusion. While Intel does have Xe Link, it likely isn't compatible with the B580 and would be too costly for a one-off project. The most probable contender is a PCIe bridge linking the GPU's interfaces, allowing them to communicate through one slot.

Just days before Computex, the parent company of Maxsun has registered new Intel Arc B580 models with 24GB of VRAM with the EEC, via Olrak at X, further stoking existing rumors of a high-VRAM Battlemage card. Remember that EEC (Eurasian Economic Commission) submissions aren't definitive confirmations of any product. Manufacturers often register placeholder configurations to cover all future possibilities, many of which never end up seeing the light of day. Therefore, you should treat this leak with a healthy dose of skepticism.

Intel launched its Arc B580 and Arc B570 GPUs in December and January, respectively, bringing its Battlemage architecture to the desktop market just months after Lunar Lake debuted on mobile. It wouldn't be an exaggeration to say these GPUs initially caused a stir in the market, offering an ample 12GB framebuffer, a capacity unheard of in the $250 GPU market. The cheapest B580s on Newegg and Best Buy are now in the $300 territory, which is a shame. That's a trend most new GPUs are facing, including AMD's RX 9000 GPUs and Nvidia's RTX 50 series.

We've been hearing rumors of a 24GB Battlemage Professional GPU since December. Recently, Sparkle accidentally alluded to the existence of an Arc B580 24GB, later retracting their comments, likely due to NDA concerns. Maxsun's parent company has registered several GPUs with the EEC, including the MAXSUN Intel Arc B580 iCraft 24G and its OC variant, matching the exact configuration Sparkle mentioned.

Intel has discontinued support for its Deep Link suite of technologies, as confirmed by a representative on GitHub, via X user Haze. After Intel quietly stopped promoting the feature in newer products such as Battlemage, it has now confirmed that active development for Deep Link has ceased. While you still might be able to use Deep Link, Intel has clarified that there will be no future updates or official support from their customer service channels.

Deep Link was introduced in late 2020. It allows you to harness the combined power of your Intel CPU and Arc GPU to improve streaming, AI acceleration, and overall efficiency. To utilize Deep Link, you needed an Intel 11th, 12th, or 13th Generation CPU and a dedicated Arc Alchemist GPU. The suite offered four key utilities: Dynamic Power Share, Stream Assist, Hyper Encode, and Hyper Compute.

Dynamic Power Share optimizes performance and power by intelligently shifting power resources between the CPU and GPU. Stream Assist improved streaming by offloading the task from the dedicated GPU to the integrated GPU. Hyper Encode accelerated video encoding using multiple Intel processors. Lastly, Hyper Compute leveraged your Intel CPU and GPU to accelerate AI workloads in OpenVINO.

Intel is gearing up to launch new Arc professional GPUs, with a recent teaser strongly suggesting these will be based on the firm's latest Battlemage (Xe2) architecture. Set to debut at Computex, these GPUs should, at minimum, offer a slight increase in memory capacities. Specifications and other technical details remain unknown, but we can expect to learn more from Intel at Taipei.

Intel's Battlemage family currently employs one die, BMG-G21, powering both the Arc B570 and Arc B580 GPUs. Rumors have alluded to several other configurations, with the most persistent being a larger BMG-G31 die, which has surfaced numerous times in shipping manifests. The majority of these shipments are destined for Vietnam, which is home to several OSAT companies that assemble, package, and test silicon. Export data alone isn't enough to confirm whether a BMG-G31-based SKU is still being developed, so we're treating this with significant skepticism.

Rumors of Battlemage-based professional cards with 24GB of VRAM have been afloat since last December. Likewise, a recent slip-up from an OEM indicated that Intel had a 24GB B580 model in the pipeline. If we put two and two together, at least one GPU from the Battlemage professional lineup is expected to employ the BMG-G21 die with twelve 16Gb GDDR6 modules arranged in a clamshell configuration. Other specifications should remain largely similar to the Arc B580.

Intel’s next-generation Xe3 Celestial GPU reportedly enters the pre-silicon validation stage, when the GPU design and architecture are being tested using software models and emulators. The chip giant conducts this testing with OEMs and independent BIOS vendors so that they can catch issues before committing actual silicon. X user Haze spotted this development and saw some details related to Celestial in the LinkedIn profiles of some Intel employees.

One profile listed “Celestial discrete GPU Pcode IP model development” as one of theresponsibilities, detailing it as “Developed pre-silicon HW modeling for power management IP in Intel Xe3 architecture for discrete GPU Celestial team (C/C++)” and “Mapped 13% of boot/reboot signal pathways for functional pcode in Celestial power management IP model (fmodel), migrating those modeled in Ruby from the test environment to C/C++ in the IP model.”

Another person said they “developed low-level system software and device drivers in C++ for Intel’s Nova Lake & Xeon6 (Diamond Rapids) CPUs and Celestial discrete GPU.”

It seems that the pre-silicon model already has its firmware and power management ready, allowing Intel’s partners to start testing it virtually with their systems. Once every kink has been ironed out and is confirmed to be working as intended, the Xe3 design can proceed to tapeout, the final step before fabrication begins.

The GPU rumor mill has been spinning like crazy this morning. The whole thing kicked off when Sparkle's Bilibili account supposedly confirmed the existence of a 24GB variant of the Intel Arc B580 (via ITHome). A media manager also alluded to a potential release window between May and June. But this was short-lived as Sparkle has officially retracted these comments. Perhaps this is a move to manage fallout after a potential NDA breach? It's hard to say for certain, but this isn't the first time we've heard of a 24GB spinoff of Battlemage.

Intel officially introduced its Arc Battlemage GPU lineup in December of last year. From this family, the Intel Arc B570 and Arc B580 were crafted using the mid-range BMG-G21 die, featuring a 192-bit interface for six memory channels. Shipping documents have suggested the existence of alternate BMG-G31 and BMG-G10 variants, likely for the B700 and B300 families, but Intel has not made any official confirmation yet.

This slip-up seemingly corroborates existing rumor, positioning this GPU under Intel's Arc Pro family, succeeding existing Alchemist-based Flex or Pro-series options, for AI applications. From what we can gather, Intel is allegedly deploying the BMG-G21 die, the same as the B580, with 24GB of memory configured using 12x 16Gb modules in clamshell mode. That's a twofold increase in memory capacity over Intel's current Arc Pro A60 offering.

Architecturally speaking, Battlemage is one generation behind Nvidia and AMD. For tasks demanding raw compute muscle, this Arc B580 24GB, or whatever Intel ends up naming it, will probably not land blows against Nvidia's Blackwell PRO or AMD's upcoming Radeon PRO W9000 GPUs. These can, however, compete in AI training and inference, which necessitate a lot of VRAM in cases like Large Language Models (LLMs), and image/video generation models like Stable Diffusion.

The economics don't favor Intel if they were to create a higher-end GPU. At similar die sizes, Intel's PPA (Performance Per Area) and architectural shortcomings become apparent: the B580 at 272mm² (using N5) is priced at $249, while Nvidia sells its RTX 5070, which uses a 263mm² die (using N4P) at $549. While N4P wafers might be pricier than N5 (likely not double), that's still a small consideration.

Either way, Sparkle's seeming confirmation, followed by a swift retraction, suggests there's potentially more beneath the surface. If this GPU does exist, we can expect to hear more from Intel at Computex, where we might also get an early look at Panther Lake, similar to how Lunar Lake was unveiled last year.

The Intel Arc B580 is considered the cheapest modern GPU on the market today, with Tom’s Hardware considering it the $249 GPU champion. However, several reviewers discovered that the budget GPU performs poorly on older processors. Intel has acknowledged the issue and will investigate it.

A moderator on the Intel Community forum started an Intel Arc Graphics and CPU Overhead thread, saying, “Thank you for your patience. We are aware of reports of performance sensitivity in some games when paired with older generation processors. We have increased our platform coverage to include more configurations in our validation process, and we are continuing to investigate optimizations.”

Reviewers first noticed the issue in early January, when they tested the Intel Arc B580 on older and newer CPUs. For example, Hardware Unboxed ran some gaming benchmarks with the GPU using an AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D and a Ryzen 5 2600. It also used an Nvidia GeForce RTX 4060 as a control, and these are its results.

GPU Benchmarks Introduction

Tom's Hardware exhaustively benchmarks every GPU to find out which are worthy of our list of the best graphics cards. Our GPU benchmarks hierarchy ranks current and previous generation graphics cards by performance. Whether it's playing games, running artificial intelligence workloads, or doing professional video editing, your graphics card typically plays the biggest role in determining performance — even the best CPUs for gaming take a secondary role.

Our 2026 GPU Hierarchy testing spans three generations of Nvidia and AMD graphics cards, as well as Intel's Arc B-series GPUs.

Our testing has been made easier by the fact that no truly new gaming GPUs have been introduced in almost a year. If you haven't already upgraded your graphics card after the GeForce RTX 50-series and Radeon RX 9000-series launches in 2025, well, you're still looking at the exact same products now.

AMD did make its formerly China-only Radeon RX 9070 GRE available globally after Computex 2026, but in our review, we found that $549 product to be too expensive given the level of performance it delivers and the compromises made to hit its price point. Check out that coverage for all the details.

Most of the products we recommend remain at elevated prices compared to their MSRPs, but this is just life in mid-2026. It's admittedly cold comfort, but unless you're shopping for an RTX 5090, graphics card prices haven't risen much more than they already did earlier this year.

Compared to the doubling or tripling of prices we've seen for RAM kits and SSDs in 2026 versus last year, a GPU upgrade remains a relatively affordable (and self-contained) option, either as a boost for an existing PC or part of an all-new parts list.

Let's dive into our ranking of GPUs past and present so you can figure out how all those cards stack up.

Prime Day exceptional graphics card deals

These are a few of the standout deals from Amazon's 2026 Prime Day event, which is currently taking place. Be sure to check out our full list of the best Prime Day graphics card deals, too. The GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy continues below.

Our full GPU hierarchy using traditional rendering (aka rasterization) comes first, and below that we have our separate ray tracing hierarchy. We've also mashed up these results into one overarching ranking for the complete pictures.

The results are all collected at native resolution, without enabling DLSS, FSR, or XeSS upscaling or frame generation.

As a brief refresher of the cards in this version of our hierarchy, Nvidia's cutting-edge Blackwell architecture and its DLSS 4 suite of tech upgrades the quality of both upscaling and ray reconstruction on RTX 50-series GPUs. It also adds Multi Frame Generation support. As of mid-2026, MFG can add anywhere from one to five AI-generated frames in between natively rendered ones.

Even if you're not into framegen, DLSS 4.5 upscaling and its transformer neural network architecture can offer a big boost in image quality at the same output resolution compared to earlier DLSS versions. That tech can benefit all GeForce RTX GPUs going back to the RTX 20-series, albeit at a heavier performance cost on older hardware compared to earlier DLSS versions.

Nvidia's Ada Lovelace architecture powers its prior-gen RTX 40-series cards. Ada introduced DLSS Frame Generation, which can double output frame rates in supported games. Ada cards don't benefit from MFG, though.

AMD's Radeon RX 9000 series cards, powered by its latest RDNA 4 architecture, get a big boost to both ray-tracing and AI capabilities with dedicated RT and matrix math accelerators. AMD uses those capabilities to enable its FSR 4 upscaler and its much-improved image quality in a small but growing range of titles, whether through native support or with driver-level overrides.

The FSR Redstone update last year brought ML Frame Generation to RX 9000-series cards. Like FSR 4.x upscaling, ML Frame Generation can be directly integrated in games or enabled through a driver override.

Meanwhile, the last-gen RDNA 3 architecture powers seven RX 7000-series seven desktop cards. Until very recently, RX 7000-series cards couldn't officially run FSR 4 upscaling, but an official version of that tech will be made available for those cards in July 2026.

Intel's Battlemage-powered Arc B580 and Arc B570 offer major improvements in performance and efficiency compared to its Alchemist architecture. Battlemage only serves the entry-level end of the graphics card market today. Intel introduced a larger Battlemage chip in the form of the Arc Pro B70 earlier this year, but that product is intended for AI and professional visualization, and it's priced like it.

On page two, you'll find our 2025-2026 test data for posterity. Page three has our 2024–2022 benchmark suite, which covers previous-generation GPUs running an older test suite and a Core i9-12900K. Page four has an even older 2020–2021 test suite with only raster games, running on a Core i9-9900K testbed. The legacy tables are no longer being actively updated. There's also the "Ancient Legacy GPU hierarchy" (without benchmarks, sorted by theoretical performance) for reference purposes.

The following tables sort everything solely by our performance-based GPU benchmarks, from fastest to slowest. Factors including real-world pricing, graphics card power consumption, overall efficiency, and features aren't factored into the rankings here. The latest results use an AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D testbed. Here are the tables and benchmark results — rasterization games first, then ray tracing games, and finally the content creation results.

GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026: The tests

For our latest GPU benchmarks, we test every card at a mix of high and ultra settings, depending on the game. We test across three resolutions: 1080p, 1440p, and 4K.

All the scores are expressed as percentages relative to the top-ranking 1080p ultra card, which is of course the GeForce RTX 5090.

Our 2026 test suite comprises the following games. 11 are raster titles, and of those, four have RT support. We test another four games that either require RT to run (DOOM: The Dark Ages and Indiana Jones and the Great Circle) or look best with RT (Assassin's Creed Shadows and Grand Theft Auto V Enhanced.)

• Black Myth Wukong (+RT)
• Alan Wake II (+RT)
• Apex Legends
• Counter-Strike 2
• Fortnite
• Arc Raiders
• Stalker 2
• DOOM: The Dark Ages (RT required)
• Grand Theft Auto V Enhanced (RT only)
• Marvel's Spider-Man 2 (+RT)
• Indiana Jones and the Great Circle (RT required)
• Marvel Rivals
• Assassin's Creed Shadows (RT only)
• Cyberpunk 2077 (+RT)
• Clair Obscur: Expedition 33

GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026: Raster gaming

The FPS score is the geometric mean (equal weighting) of all 11 games. Note that the specifications column links directly to our original review for the various GPUs.

Rasterization GPU Benchmarks, Key Findings

• Unsurprisingly, the RTX 5090 takes the top spot across the board, but prices remain stratospheric in mid-2026. It's also difficult to fully engage the GB202 GPU for pure raster gaming unless you're playing at 4K.
• Among current cards, the RX 9060 XT 8GB and RTX 5060 duke it out for the best performance per dollar at 1080p.
• The Radeon RX 9070 is the 1440p raster value champ. The recently introduced RX 9070 GRE sits just behind, and the RTX 5070 is a somewhat distant third.
• At 4K, the RX 9070 XT is the cheapest way to get into 4K 60 FPS native gaming. But the RX 9070 and RTX 5070 are also strong options among current GPUs if you're willing to enable a dash of upscaling.

Overall, if you're only interested in native raster gaming, Radeons are a strong choice in 2026. But Nvidia offers superior DLSS 4.5 upscaling and Multi Frame Generation support across all RTX 50-series cards, which makes matching your GPU's performance to your monitor's refresh rate a snap.

FSR 4.x upscaling isn't on par with DLSS 4.5 yet, and FSR ML Frame Generation is limited to a 2x framerate boost where it's available.

Rasterization GPU Benchmarks Rankings 2026

Remember that we're not including any upscaling or framegen results in the above table. DLSS, FSR, and XeSS offer differing image quality, and we want to keep things directly comparable.

Don't buy any of the cards at the top of our hierarchy without a high-refresh-rate 2560x1440 or 4K monitor to match. Even one of our best gaming CPUs, like the Ryzen 7 9800X3D, can only do so much when a powerful card becomes CPU-bound.

In general, if you're still running a 60 Hz fixed-refresh-rate monitor, it's entirely possible that you're not seeing all the frames your graphics card can generate. Practically any current-gen graphics card from the RTX 5060 on up is good enough for high-refresh-rate gaming at 1080p in 2026 even without upscaling or framegen, and the RTX 5070 or RX 9070 will give you the same experience at 1440p.

In this era of upscaling and framegen, a high-resolution monitor is no longer an obstacle to the best gaming experience. Upscalers work best with higher-than-1080p output resolutions, and the advent of the DLSS 4.5 upscaling model especially means that you can get both smooth performance and crisp image quality from surprisingly modest graphics cards.

But if you don't have a high-refresh-rate 1440p or 4K monitor to begin with, you can't take full advantage of the free boost to both performance and image quality that AI-powered upscaling offers, nor can you enjoy the full smoothness boost of framegen. Check out our list of the best gaming monitors for a potential upgrade if you're still rocking a 1080p 60 Hz display from the 2010s.

On to our 2026 raster results. Among currently available graphics cards, Blackwell rules the top three spots. The RX 9070 XT ends up fourth, just behind the potent (but much more expensive, as of June 2026) RTX 5070 Ti.

Moving into the midrange, the RX 9070's strong raster performance gives it the edge over the RTX 5070, but it's close. And the 5070 has the full arsenal of DLSS 4.5 features at its disposal in virtually every modern game.

Given the image quality and smoothness advantage of DLSS 4.5 upscaling and MFG, the 5070 got the nod in our most recent round of best graphics card picks after our 2026 retests.

The recently introduced RX 9070 GRE lands between the 5070 and the lower-end 5060 Ti and 9060 XT, a position for which Nvidia has no current-gen answer (and no easy path to one.) But AMD may have priced the GRE too high at $549, and we're already seeing big price drops on that product that might make it uniquely appealing in a market where the RTX 5060 Ti is its direct price competition.

The formerly midrange RTX 5060 Ti 16GB is hopelessly overpriced for the performance it offers in mid-2026, and the formerly somewhat affordable 8GB model is also selling for elevated prices now, making the entire 5060 Ti family impossible to recommend.

The RX 9060 XT 16GB holds down the entry-midrange 16GB position by itself, and its $459 price tag isn't so absurd as to make it un-recommendable. But as RX 9070 GREs start going on sale for $500-ish, the step up is going to look mighty tempting.

As we move further down the stack, the $300-ish Arc B580 represents Intel's best card right now, but it remains very much a budget part in mid-2026, trading blows with the RTX 3060 Ti and RTX 4060. The only reason it lands as high as it does in our results is that its 12GB of VRAM prevents its performance from totally plummeting at 4K, as it does for those older 8GB cards.

The RTX 5060 is 24% faster than the Arc B580 at 1080p and 17% faster at 1440p, and its prices are proportionately higher. The scarce RX 9060 XT 8GB is a whole 30% faster at 1080p and 23% faster at 1440p, for similarly more money.

We don't think the potential longevity afforded by the B580's 12GB of VRAM is worth the massive performance tradeoff versus current-gen 8GB GPUs. Save up a few more bucks and grab an RTX 5060 or RX 9060 8GB instead (and enjoy the more widely adopted DLSS 4.5 or FSR 4 versus XeSS while you're at it).

The $250 Arc B570 is still a good value in mid-2026, and as the only modern, decent graphics card available for (well) under $300, it's still worth a look if you can't stretch to an RTX 5050. But recent software ills that took months to fix have led us to consider it more of a gamble than a product worthy of a recommendation, even though those issues did eventually get corrected.

Ray Tracing GPU Benchmarks 2026

For 2026, we're testing a range of RT titles that present a progressively more difficult workload to the GPUs under test.

Grand Theft Auto V Enhanced, DOOM: The Dark Ages, and Indiana Jones and the Great Circle are all relatively lightweight RT titles that will run on a wide range of RT-ready hardware. Spider-Man 2, Cyberpunk 2077, and Assassin's Creed Shadows represent greater challenges to compute resources, VRAM, or both. And Black Myth Wukong and Alan Wake II still bring even the most powerful graphics cards to their knees at native resolutions.

Our results for those more demanding games represent more of a jumping-off point for upscaling and framegen rather than native performance. But lighter RT titles mean that you can explore the differences in image quality that ray tracing offers without crushing your GPU flat.

In any case, graphics cards at the top of our RT tests are ready for practically any RT game. But as you'll see, that's still quite the high bar to clear in 2026.

Ray Tracing GPU Benchmarks, Key Findings and Notes

• The RTX 5090 really comes into its own with RT enabled, as expected.
• AMD's RX 9070 XT outperforms the RX 7900 XTX in our RT tests, showing that the ray-tracing improvements in RDNA 4 deliver.
• Even with those improvements, the RX 9070 XT can only manage a tie with the RTX 4070 Ti with RT in play, coming in eighth place overall.
• Maintaining 60 FPS in RT titles (as a good foundation for upscaling and framegen enhancements) is a very tall order. Among recent products, you'll want:
  • an RTX 5060 Ti 16GB, RTX 5070, or RX 9070 GRE to handle ~60 FPS RT at 1080p without running out of VRAM
  • An RTX 4070, an RTX 5070 or RX 9070 at 1440p, or an RX 9070 XT or RTX 5070 Ti for the best possible experience
  • An RTX 5080, RTX 4090, or RTX 5090 at 4K

Ray Tracing GPU Benchmarks Rankings 2026

The RTX 5090 and RTX 4090 lead our RT results. But if you want to enjoy high-end RT without a 4090- or 5090-sized bankroll, the RTX 5070 Ti proves itself as the last card with a reasonable price-to-performance ratio before things get crazy.

The 5070 Ti leads the RX 9070 XT by a wide margin in our RT tests, and it's anywhere from 10%-15% behind the absurdly overpriced RTX 5080 across the board. But if you want the absolute best RT performance possible without stepping up to a 4090 or 5090, the extra cash for a 5080 is your best — and only — option.

That said, you should really explore DLSS 4.5 upscaling and MFG on the 5070 Ti before spending big to step up to a 5080.

The RX 9070 XT remains AMD's fastest RT GPU, outpacing the 7900 XTX across all tested resolutions. It leads the RDNA 3 halo card by about 10% across the board, which is an impressive generational leap considering its 33% deficit in CUs versus the XTX.

But the 9070 XT can only trade blows with the RTX 4070 Ti and RTX 5070 with Nvidia competition in the picture. It beats out the 5070 at 1080p and 1440p, but DLSS 4.5 upscaling and MFG give Blackwell gamers more flexible options for boosting performance with only minimal impact to image quality versus both RDNA 4 (and Ada).

Of course, the RX 9070 XT has FSR 4 upscaling and framegen at its disposal in compatible titles, but support for those features isn't as widespread as DLSS.

Meanwhile, the RX 9070 comes in slightly behind the RTX 5070 at 1080p and 1440p for RT. Even though its 16GB of VRAM prevents the 9070's 4K RT performance from completely nosediving, the average frame rate at that resolution isn't high enough to make it a 4K RT choice.

At 1080p, the RX 9070 GRE presents an intriguing RT option for Radeon gamers, delivering a near-60-FPS average baseline that would make a great FSR 4 foundation. But its 12GB of VRAM quickly becomes a liability at 1440p versus the 9070, and 4K is out of the question.

Overall, our demanding 2026 RT test suite shows that the bar for entry to a good RT experience remains high, especially as elevated prices on the RTX 5060 Ti 16GB mean that the first "real" RT-ready Blackwell card at 1080p and up is the RTX 5070. And on the Radeon side, you really want an RX 9070 GRE or RX 9070 for the best experience.

Test Setup and Hardware for GPU Benchmarks

We've used several different PCs for our testing over the years. The latest update switches to an AMD Zen 5 processor: the unparalleled Ryzen 7 9800X3D and its 3D V-Cache-enhanced performance.

Here are the specifications for our latest GPU test PC.

Tom's Hardware 2026 GPU Benchmarks Testbed

CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D
CPU Cooler: Thermalright Phantom Spirit 120 SE
Memory: G.Skill Trident Z5 32GB (2x16GB) DDR5-6000 CL30
Motherboard: Asus TUF Gaming X670E-Plus Wifi
SSD: Inland Performance Plus 4TB
PSU: MSI MPG Ai1600TS 1600W

We test across the three most common gaming resolutions, 1080p, 1440p, and 4K, using a mix of high and ultra settings, depending on the title. Where possible, we use 'reference' cards for all of these tests, like Nvidia's Founders Edition models and AMD's reference designs. Most midrange and lower GPUs don't get reference models, however, and in some cases we only have factory-overclocked cards for testing. We do our best to select cards that are close to the reference specs in such cases.

For each graphics card, we follow the same testing procedure. We run one pass of each benchmark to "warm up" the GPU after launching the game, then perform our actual test runs across each resolution.

We carefully review our test data and check for anomalies. For example, we always expect the RTX 5080 to be faster than the RTX 5070 Ti. If it's not, and we're not in a CPU limited situation, we'll recheck both cards to ensure that our standings our accurate. We also check and retest in cases of subtler issues, as when a transient hitch or frame-time spike causes a large dip in 1% low FPS.

Due to the length of time required for testing each GPU, updated drivers and game patches inevitably come out that can impact performance. We periodically retest a few sample cards to verify our results are still valid, and if not, we go through and retest the affected game(s) and GPU(s). We may also add games to our test suite over time, if one comes out that is popular and conducive to testing. See what makes a good game benchmark for our selection criteria.

GPU Benchmarks: Individual Game Charts

The above tables provide a summary of performance, but for those that want to see the individual game charts, for both the standard and ray tracing test suites, we've got those as well. These charts only cover current-gen GPUs for readability.

These charts are up to date as of June 2026.

GPU Benchmarks — 1080p

GPU Benchmarks — 1440p

GPU Benchmarks — 4K

GPU Benchmarks — Power, Clocks, and Temperatures

Most of our discussion has focused on performance, but for those interested in power and other aspects of the GPUs, here are the appropriate charts. We'll run these from highest to lowest settings, as 4K ultra tends to be the most strenuous workload on most of these GPUs.

If you're looking for the legacy GPU hierarchy, head over to page two! We moved it to a separate page to help improve load times in our CMS as well as for the main website. And if you're looking to comment on the GPU benchmarks hierarchy, head over to our forums and join the discussion!

Choosing a Graphics Card

Choosing a Graphics Card

Choosing a Graphics Card

Which graphics card do you need? To help you decide, we created this GPU benchmarks hierarchy, comprising 48 GPUs from three generations of hardware for Nvidia and AMD and also including Intel's Battlemage cards. Not surprisingly, the fastest cards are using the latest GPU architectures, though they're not always a major upgrade over the prior generation.

Of course, it's not just about playing games. Many applications use the GPU for other work. But a good graphics card for gaming will typically do equally well in complex GPU computational workloads. Buy one of the top cards and you can run games at high resolutions and frame rates with the effects turned all the way up, and you'll be able to do content creation work as needed. Drop down to the middle and lower portions of the list and you'll need to start dialing down the settings to get acceptable performance in regular gameplay and GPU benchmarks.

If your main goal is gaming, you can't forget about the CPU. Getting the best possible gaming GPU won't help you much if your CPU is underpowered or many years out of date. So be sure to check out the Best CPUs for gaming page, as well as our CPU Benchmarks Hierarchy to make sure you have the right CPU for the level of gaming performance you're looking to achieve.

And don't forget about your monitor. Be sure to get a display whose refresh rate range matches the average frame rates of the graphics card that you want in the games that you play. Check out our list of the best gaming monitors for a starting point.

GPU Benchmarks from 2022–2024

Our 'legacy' GPU benchmarks used different hardware. Here are the details for the 2022–2024 configuration that used an Alder Lake 12900K CPU.

Tom's Hardware 2022–2024 GPU Testbed

Intel Core i9-12900K
MSI Pro Z690-A WiFi DDR4
Corsair 2x16GB DDR4-3600 CL16
Crucial P5 Plus 2TB
Cooler Master MWE 1250 V2 Gold
Cooler Master PL360 Flux
Cooler Master HAF500
Windows 11 Pro 64-bit

We have upgraded our test system and changed our test suite for 2025, effectively resetting our benchmarking and rankings. However, the old data — collected using a Core i9-12900K PC — remains valid. We aren't testing new GPUs with the old testbed, as that would double the time required for what is already a lengthy process, but we felt it would be helpful to some to keep the final data available.

We also had an interim system that never quite got wrapped up, which had a Core i9-13900K Raptor Lake CPU. Our original CPU was one of the impacted units that failed over time, which explains in retrospect why so much of the data felt a bit questionable. Thankfully, the new Ryzen 7 9800X3D system seems to be running just fine. Here are the 12900K results.

For these GPU benchmarks, we tested nearly every GPU released between 2016 and 2024, plus a few extras. All graphics cards were tested at 1080p medium and 1080p ultra, and we sorted the table by the 1080p ultra results. Where it made sense, we also tested at 1440p ultra and 4K ultra. All the scores are scaled relative to the top-ranking 1080p ultra card of the time, which in our suite is the RTX 4090 — especially at 4K and 1440p.

The above summary charts show the relative performance of the cards we've tested across the past several generations of hardware at 1080p ultra — swipe through the above gallery if you want to see the 1080p medium, 1440p, and 4K ultra images. There are a few missing options (e.g., the GT 1030, RX 550, and several Titan cards), but otherwise it's basically complete. Note that we also have data in the table below for some of the other older GPUs.

The eight games used for our standard GPU benchmarks hierarchy are Borderlands 3 (DX12), Far Cry 6 (DX12), Flight Simulator (DX11 Nvidia, DX12 AMD/Intel), Forza Horizon 5 (DX12), Horizon Zero Dawn (DX12), Red Dead Redemption 2 (Vulkan), Total War Warhammer 3 (DX11), and Watch Dogs Legion (DX12). The fps score is the geometric mean (equal weighting) of the eight games. Note that the specifications column links directly to our original review for the various GPUs.

*: GPU couldn't run all tests, so the overall score is slightly skewed at 1080p ultra.

While the RTX 4090 does technically take first place at 1080p ultra, it's the 1440p and especially 4K numbers that impress. It's less than 2% faster than the RTX 4080 Super at 1080p ultra, but that increases to 9% at 1440p and then 25% at 4K. Also note that the fps numbers in our table incorporate both the average and minimum fps into a single score — with the average given more weight than the 1% low fps.

Again, keep in mind that we're not including any ray tracing or DLSS results in the above table, as we use the same test suite with the same settings on all current and previous generation graphics cards. Since only RTX cards support DLSS (and RTX 40-series if you want DLSS 3), that would drastically limit which cards we could directly compare. You can see DLSS 2/3 and FSR 2 upscaling results in our RTX 4070 review if you want to check out how the various upscaling modes can help.

The RTX 4090 comes at a steep price, though on paper it's not that much worse than the previous generation RTX 3090. In fact, we'd say it's a lot better in some respects, as the 3090 was only a minor improvement in performance compared to the 3080 at the time of launch, but with more than double the VRAM. Nvidia pulled out all the stops with the 4090, increasing the core counts, clock speeds, and power limits to push it beyond all contenders. There are two problems with the 4090, however: It's not available at MSRP any longer, due to demand from the AI sector — it often costs $2,000 or more — and there are still concerns with pulling 450W of power over the 16-pin connector.

Stepping down from the RTX 4090, the RTX 4080 Super and RX 7900 XTX trade blows at higher resolutions, while CPU bottlenecks come into play at 1080p. We'll be switching our testbed in the near future, with the current results from our 13900K testing in the charts at the bottom of the page.

Outside of the latest releases from AMD and Nvidia, the RX 6000- and RTX 30-series chips still perform reasonably well and if you're using such a card, there may not be any need to upgrade at present. Intel's Arc GPUs also fall into this category and are something of a wild card.

We've been testing and retesting GPUs periodically, and the Arc chips running the latest drivers now complete all of our benchmarks without any major anomalies. (Minecraft was previously a problem, though Intel has finally sorted that out.) They're not great on efficiency, but overall performance and pricing for the A750 is quite good.

Turning to the previous generation GPUs, the RTX 20-series and GTX 16-series chips end up scattered throughout the results, along with the RX 5000-series. The general rule of thumb is that you get one or two "model upgrades" with the newer architectures, so for example the RTX 2080 Super comes in just below the RTX 3060 Ti, while the RX 5700 XT basically matches the newer and less expensive RX 6600 XT.

Go back far enough and you can see how modern games at ultra settings severely punish cards that don't have more than 4GB VRAM. We've been saying for a few years now that 4GB was just scraping by, and these days we'd avoid buying anything with less than 8GB of VRAM — 12GB or more is the minimum we'd want with a mainstream GPU, and 16GB or more for high-end and above. Old cards like the GTX 1060 3GB and GTX 1050 actually failed to run some of our tests, which skews their results a bit, even though they do better at 1080p medium.

Now let's switch over to the ray tracing hierarchy.

Ray Tracing GPU Benchmarks 2022–2024

Enabling ray tracing, particularly with demanding games like many of those we're using in our DXR test suite, can cause framerates to drop off a cliff. We're testing with "medium" and "ultra" ray tracing settings. Medium generally means using the medium graphics preset but turning on ray tracing effects (set to "medium" if that's an option; otherwise, "on"), while ultra turns on all of the RT options at more or less maximum quality.

Because ray tracing is so much more demanding, we're sorting these results by the 1080p medium scores. That's also because the RX 6500 XT, RX 6400, and Arc A380 basically can't handle ray tracing even at these settings, and testing at anything more than 1080p medium would be fruitless.

The five ray tracing games used are Bright Memory Infinite, Control Ultimate Edition, Cyberpunk 2077, Metro Exodus Enhanced, and Minecraft — all of these use the DirectX 12 / DX12 Ultimate API. The fps score is the geometric mean (equal weighting) of the five games, and the percentage is scaled relative to the fastest GPU in the list, which again is the GeForce RTX 4090.

If you want to see what the future may hold with ray tracing, check out our Alan Wake 2 benchmarks where the full path tracing barely manages playable performance even with upscaling on non-Nvidia GPUs. However, and this is a critical point, the number of games where RT truly makes a striking difference in visuals is extremely limited. For most games, we still feel running pure rasterization rendering makes more sense.

If you felt the RTX 4090 performance was impressive at 4K in our standard test suite, just take a look at the results with ray tracing. Nvidia put even more ray tracing enhancements into the Ada Lovelace architecture, and those start to show up here. There are still further potential performance improvements for ray tracing with SER, OMM, and DMM — not to mention DLSS 3, though that ends up being a bit of a mixed bag, since the generated frames don't include new user input and add latency.

If you want a real kick in the pants, we also ran many of the faster ray tracing GPUs through Cyberpunk 2077's RT Overdrive mode, which implements full "path tracing" (full ray tracing, without any rasterization) — as well as Alan Wake 2, which uses path tracing at higher settings, and Black Myth: Wukong that supports full ray tracing. Those games provide a glimpse of how future games could behave, and why upscaling and AI techniques like frame generation are here to stay.

Even at 1080p medium, a relatively tame setting for DXR (DirectX Raytracing), the RTX 4090 roars past all contenders and leads the previous generation RTX 3090 Ti by 41%. At 1080p ultra, the lead grows to 53%, and it's nearly 64% at 1440p. Nvidia made claims before the RTX 4090 launch that it was "2x to 4x faster than the RTX 3090 Ti" — factoring in DLSS 3's Frame Generation technology — but even without DLSS 3, the 4090 is 72% faster than the 3090 Ti at 4K.

AMD continued to relegate DXR and ray tracing to secondary status, focusing more on improving rasterization performance — and on reducing manufacturing costs through the use of chiplets on the new RDNA 3 GPUs. As such, the ray tracing performance from AMD isn't particularly impressive. The top RX 7900 XTX basically matches Nvidia's previous generation RTX 3080 12GB, which puts it barely ahead of the RTX 4070 — and that's not even in all DXR games. There are some minor improvements for RT performance in RDNA 3, though, as the 7800 XT for example ends up basically tied with the RX 6800 XT in rasterization performance but is 10% faster in DXR performance.

Intel's Arc A7-series parts show a decent blend of performance in general, with the A750 coming in ahead of the RTX 3060 overall. With the latest drivers (and with vsync forced off in the options.txt file), Minecraft performance also looks much more in line with the other Arc DXR results.

You can also see what DLSS Quality mode did for performance in DXR games on the RTX 4090 in our review, but the short summary is that it boosted performance by 78% at 4K ultra. DLSS 3 frame generation improved framerates another 30% to 100% in our testing, though we recommend exercising (extreme) caution when looking at FPS with the feature enabled. It can boost framerates in benchmarks, but when actually playing games it often doesn't feel much faster than without the feature.

Overall, with DLSS 2, the 4090 in our ray tracing test suite is nearly four times as fast as AMD's RX 7900 XTX. Ouch. AMD's FSR 2 and FSR 3 can help as well, and AMD continues to work on increasing the rate of adoption, but it still trails DLSS both in the number of games supported and in the overall image quality. Only two of the games in our DXR suite have FSR2 support. By comparison, all of the DXR games we're testing support DLSS2 — and one also supports DLSS3.

Without FSR2, AMD's fastest GPUs can only clear 60 fps at 1080p ultra, while remaining decently playable at 1440p with 40–50 fps on average. But native 4K DXR remains out of reach for just about every GPU, with only the 3090 Ti and above breaking the 30 fps mark on the composite score — and a couple of games still come up short on the 3090 Ti.

AMD also has FSR 3 frame generation. Like DLSS3, it adds latency, and AMD requires the integration of Anti-Lag+ support in games that use FSR 3. But Anti-Lag+ only works with AMD GPUs, which means non-AMD cards will likely incur a larger latency penalty. We've tested it in Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora and found it worked pretty well, but that was not the case in Forspoken and Immortals of Aveum. It has since gained a lot more traction, though quality and latency remain quite variable — it can look and run well in one game, and then fall flat in another.

The midrange GPUs like the RTX 3070 and RX 6700 XT basically manage 1080p ultra and not much more, while the bottom tier of DXR-capable GPUs barely manage 1080p medium — and the RX 6500 XT can't even do that, with single digit framerates in most of our test suite, and one game that wouldn't even work at our chosen "medium" settings. (Control requires at least 6GB VRAM to let you enable ray tracing.)

Intel's Arc A380 ends up just ahead of the RX 6500 XT in ray tracing performance, which is interesting considering it only has 8 RTUs going up against AMD's 16 Ray Accelerators. Intel posted a deep dive into its ray tracing hardware, and Arc seems reasonably impressive, except for the fact that the number of RTUs severely limits performance. The top-end A770 still only has 32 RTUs, which proves sufficient for it to pull ahead (barely) of the RTX 3060 in DXR testing, but it can't go much further than that. Arc A750 and above also ends up ahead of AMD's RX 6750 XT in DXR performance, showing just how poor AMD's RDNA 2 hardware is when it comes to ray tracing.

It's also interesting to look at the generational performance of Nvidia's RTX cards. The slowest 20-series GPU, the RTX 2060, still outperforms the newer RTX 3050 by a bit, but the fastest RTX 2080 Ti comes in a bit behind the RTX 3070. Where the 2080 Ti basically doubled the performance of the 2060, the 3090 delivers about triple the performance of the 3050.

Test System and How We Test for GPU Benchmarks

For each graphics card, we follow the same testing procedure. We run one pass of each benchmark to "warm up" the GPU after launching the game, then run at least two passes at each setting/resolution combination. If the two runs are basically identical (within 0.5% or less difference), we use the faster of the two runs. If there's more than a small difference, we run the test at least twice more to determine what "normal" performance is supposed to be.

We also look at all the data and check for anomalies, so for example RTX 3070 Ti, RTX 3070, and RTX 3060 Ti all generally going to perform within a narrow range — 3070 Ti is about 5% faster than 3070, which is about 5% faster than 3060 Ti. If we see games where there are clear outliers (i.e. performance is more than 10% higher for the cards just mentioned), we'll go back and retest whatever cards are showing the anomaly and figure out what the "correct" result would be.

Due to the length of time required for testing each GPU, updated drivers and game patches inevitably will come out that can impact performance. We periodically retest a few sample cards to verify our results are still valid, and if not, we go through and retest the affected game(s) and GPU(s). We may also add games to our test suite over the coming year, if one comes out that is popular and conducive to testing — see our what makes a good game benchmark for our selection criteria.

GPU Benchmarks: Individual Game Charts

The above tables provide a summary of performance, but for those that want to see the individual game charts, for both the standard and ray tracing test suites, we've got those as well. We're only including more recent GPUs in these charts, as otherwise things get very messy. These are also using a newer test suite and a 13900K CPU, which changes the performance slightly from the above table, simply because our newest tests are more relevant (but haven't been run on a lot of the older GPUs shown in the tables).

These charts were up to date as of November 11, 2024.

GPU Benchmarks — 1080p Medium

GPU Benchmarks — 1080p Ultra

GPU Benchmarks — 1440p Ultra

GPU Benchmarks — 4K Ultra

GPU Benchmarks — Power, Clocks, and Temperatures

Most of our discussion has focused on performance, but for those interested in power and other aspects of the GPUs, here are the appropriate charts.

Our even older 2020–2021 'legacy' GPU benchmarks used another set of hardware with different games. Here are the details for the Coffee Lake 9900K and Z390 PC.

Tom's Hardware 2020–2021 GPU Testbed

Intel Core i9-9900K
Corsair H150i Pro RGB
MSI MEG Z390 Ace
Corsair 2x16GB DDR4-3200
XPG SX8200 Pro 2TB
Windows 10 Pro (21H1)

The results below combine results from nine games with six resolution and setting combinations. All of the scores are combined (via a geometric mean calculation) into a single overall result, which tends to penalize the fastest and slowest GPUs — CPU bottlenecks come into play at 1080p medium, while VRAM limitations can kill performance at 4K ultra.

These results have not been updated since early 2022, when we added the RTX 3050 and RX 6500 XT to the list. We won't be adding future GPUs to this table, so there's no RTX 40-series, RX 7000-series, Arc, 3090 Ti, 6950 XT, 6750 XT, or 6650 XT, but it does help to provide a look at a slightly less demanding suite of games, where 6GB or more VRAM isn't generally required at 1080p ultra settings. You can use these older results to help inform your purchase decisions, if you don't typically run the latest games at maxed out settings.

Ancient Legacy GPU Hierarchy

Below is our legacy desktop GPU hierarchy dating back to the late 1990s. We have not tested most of these cards in many years, driver support has ended on most models, and the relative rankings are pretty coarse. Note that we also don't factor in memory bandwidth or features like AMD's Infinity Cache or Nvidia's larger L2 cache on Ada Lovelace. The list below is mostly intended to show relative performance between architectures from a similar time period.

We sorted the table by the theoretical GFLOPS, though on architectures that don't support unified shaders, we only have data for "Gops/s" (giga operations per second). That's GeForce 7 and Radeon X1000 and earlier — basically anything from before 2007. We've put an asterisk (*) next to the GPU names for those cards, and they comprise the latter part of the table. Comparing pre-2007 GPUs against each other should be relatively meaningful, but trying to compare those older GPUs against newer GPUs gets a bit convoluted.

These results are, at best, merely theoretical and we don't have any recent benchmarks for most of the GPUs. As one recent example, AMD's RX 7900 GRE ranks above the RTX 4070 Ti Super, even though Nvidia's card nearly matches the RX 7900 XT in rasterization performance and easily beats even the 7900 XTX in ray tracing performance. Take the following with a healthy dose of skepticism and a liberal sprinkling of salt, in other words, but it does contain a list of just about every major desktop GPU from the past 25 years.