<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:dc="https://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
     xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
     xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
>
    <channel>
                    <atom:link href="https://www.tomshardware.com/feeds/tag/ray-tracing" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
                            <title><![CDATA[ Latest from Tom's Hardware in Ray-tracing ]]></title>
                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/tag/ray-tracing</link>
        <description><![CDATA[ All the latest ray-tracing content from the Tom's Hardware team ]]></description>
                                    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2026 09:30:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
                            <language>en</language>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ DLSS 4.5 Ray Reconstruction update arrives in August for better ray tracing visuals — broader training data set and second-gen transformer architecture combine for improved image quality ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/pc-gaming/dlss-4-5-ray-reconstruction-update-arrives-in-august-for-better-ray-tracing-visuals-broader-training-data-set-and-second-gen-transformer-architecture-combine-for-improved-image-quality</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ At Computex 2026, Nvidia announced DLSS 4.5 Ray Reconstruction, an updated version of its neural RT denoiser with a second-gen transformer architecture and a broader training data set for better output image quality. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">HkWUvR9YpSDePJ5XrJZdRQ</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PZsqFCGm4B3oJBzRLMFFNW-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2026 09:30:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <category><![CDATA[PC Gaming]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Video Games]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jeffrey Kampman ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8JCjGs5yVZds2YdKmzjUDE.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jeff Kampman has been playing PC games ever since he learned how to fire up freeware CDs from the DOS command line. He started building his own PCs in the mid-aughts and later turned that passion into a career, working as a news and guides writer, reviewer, and ultimately Editor-in-Chief at The Tech Report, where he dove deep on CPUs and GPUs (and more) in pursuit of the smoothest gaming experiences around. Jeff later took on roles at Asus and Intel as a technical marketer before joining Tom&#039;s Hardware. As Senior Analyst, Graphics, Jeff covers everything from integrated graphics processors to discrete graphics cards to the massive data center GPU installations powering our AI future. Jeff is also a hobbyist photographer, Twitch streamer, espresso enthusiast, and runner.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PZsqFCGm4B3oJBzRLMFFNW-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Nvidia]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[A representation of DLSS 4.5 Ray Reconstruction]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[A representation of DLSS 4.5 Ray Reconstruction]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[A representation of DLSS 4.5 Ray Reconstruction]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PZsqFCGm4B3oJBzRLMFFNW-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Nvidia has been releasing major improvements to its DLSS suite of neural rendering tech throughout 2026. The first major update came at CES <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/nvidia-introduces-dlss-4-5-and-multi-frame-generation-6x-at-ces-2026-updated-models-can-generate-higher-quality-upscaled-frames-and-more-of-them-dynamically" target="_blank">with DLSS 4.5 upscaling (or "Super Resolution")</a>, which introduced a more advanced and more computationally intensive transformer AI architecture for better image quality at lower input resolutions. The second was DLSS 4.5 Multi Frame Generation, which introduced 5x and 6x multipliers along with a dynamic mode that shifts multipliers on the fly for the smoothest gameplay experience. </p><p>Now, at <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/tag/computex">Computex 2026,</a> Nvidia <a href="https://www.nvidia.com/en-my/geforce/news/dlss-4-5-ray-reconstruction-1000-rtx-games-apps-out-now/" target="_blank">has revealed DLSS 4.5 Ray Reconstruction</a>, its advanced denoiser for better ray-traced and path-traced image quality in games. </p><p>For a refresher, DLSS Ray Reconstruction replaces hand-tuned denoisers with a neural rendering model that both infers what pixels should look like in noisy areas where light rays weren't cast and upscales the resulting image to a higher-resolution output. The model uses temporal and spatial inputs from game engines to produce its sharp, stable, and high-fidelity output images. </p><p>DLSS 4.5 Ray Reconstruction, coming in August, improves this set of techniques in three ways. Using an improved transformer architecture, it can process 35% more input data and uses 20% more parameters within the same compute budget as the previous-generation transformer architecture. </p><p>DLSS 4.5 Ray Reconstruction also inherits better spatial awareness and processing of input data from DLSS 4.5 Super Resolution, resulting in more accurate lighting, more stable images, and clearer motion. Nvidia says the mew model has also been trained on a larger data set to improve its utilization of game inputs and offers developers more control over its temporal accumulation behavior, both of which result in improved image quality. </p><p>Unlike DLSS 4.5 Super Resolution, which incurs substantial performance penalties on older hardware, DLSS 4.5 Ray Reconstruction will remain 100% compatible with every GeForce RTX GPU, including RTX 20-series and RTX 30-series products. </p><p>Nvidia touts a couple of scenarios where DLSS 4.5 Ray Reconstruction makes a big difference in image quality, and the improved performance of the model is indeed easily visible. </p><div class="youtube-video" data-nosnippet ><div class="video-aspect-box"><iframe data-lazy-priority="high" data-lazy-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/UXIfEBPEaD0" allowfullscreen></iframe></div></div><p>In <em>Pragmata</em>, the flickering of a laser trap becomes much more dynamic, and it doesn't leave persistent artifacts when those same lasers deactivate. </p><div class="youtube-video" data-nosnippet ><div class="video-aspect-box"><iframe data-lazy-priority="low" data-lazy-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/dSMYgGi0ZvY" allowfullscreen></iframe></div></div><p>And in <em>Alan Wake II</em>, a wall of TVs displaying nothing but static transforms from a mere suggestion into a crisp, convincing reproduction of CRT snow. And the reflections from those TVs on the nearby floor also becomes much more dynamic and lifelike. </p><p>Ray Reconstruction has always been the most specialized of the DLSS model family, so it's perhaps unsurprising that it's the last of the three to be updated this year. Nvidia says it'll come to 27 games in August via the Nvidia App, including hits like <em>Cyberpunk 2077</em>, <em>Hogwarts Legacy</em>, <em>Pragmata</em>, and <em>Resident Evil Requiem</em>. And of course, it's fully compatible with the Blackwell GPU on the RTX Spark.</p><div class="youtube-video" data-nosnippet ><div class="video-aspect-box"><iframe data-lazy-priority="low" data-lazy-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/XYvUsBFkJMA" allowfullscreen></iframe></div></div><p>The benefits of Ray Reconstruction will soon move beyond games, too. Nvidia is bringing this model to Blender, where it will replace slow denoisers that incur significant wait times for the viewport to re-stabilize every time the camera is moved. Along with Nvidia Optix, Ray Reconstruction in Blender promises a much more interactive viewport experience and near-final image quality, resulting in a better representation of one's creative vision and less disruption to the creative flow state. </p><p>We'll be going hands-on with some of Nvidia's latest products and releases at Computex 2026, and it's likely we'll be able to see DLSS 4.5 Ray Reconstruction in action. Stay tuned for more details as we get them. </p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Dynamic MFG comes to RTX 50-series GPUs to push monitor refresh rates to the max — more flexible mode with 5x and 6x multipliers arrives March 31 ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/dynamic-mfg-comes-to-rtx-50-series-gpus-to-push-monitor-refresh-rates-to-the-max-more-flexible-mode-with-5x-and-6x-multipliers-arrives-march-31</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Dynamic Multi Frame Generation, announced back at CES, will be arriving March 31, along with extended 5X and 6X modes. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">uuTc6k5dBtKfEkr2TEQ4q5</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BpxH4zubLiwWfq3Y9Nj2HX-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2026 16:39:05 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jeffrey Kampman ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8JCjGs5yVZds2YdKmzjUDE.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jeff Kampman has been playing PC games ever since he learned how to fire up freeware CDs from the DOS command line. He started building his own PCs in the mid-aughts and later turned that passion into a career, working as a news and guides writer, reviewer, and ultimately Editor-in-Chief at The Tech Report, where he dove deep on CPUs and GPUs (and more) in pursuit of the smoothest gaming experiences around. Jeff later took on roles at Asus and Intel as a technical marketer before joining Tom&#039;s Hardware. As Senior Analyst, Graphics, Jeff covers everything from integrated graphics processors to discrete graphics cards to the massive data center GPU installations powering our AI future. Jeff is also a hobbyist photographer, Twitch streamer, espresso enthusiast, and runner.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BpxH4zubLiwWfq3Y9Nj2HX-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Nvidia]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[A representation of DLSS MFG]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[A representation of DLSS MFG]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[A representation of DLSS MFG]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BpxH4zubLiwWfq3Y9Nj2HX-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>The annual Game Developers Conference (GDC) kicks off this week, and it’s happening against the backdrop of considerable turmoil in both the games industry proper and the AI-driven hardware supply shock that’s delaying mid-cycle and next-gen gaming hardware. In that context, it’s no surprise that Nvidia isn't bringing new GeForce cards to the show. Instead, the company is focusing on software performance enhancements and game tech integrations for upcoming titles. </p><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">Go deeper with TH Premium: GPUs</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="Wh9EZgD8NG9yUioNNgPB3d" name="ASUS RTX 5080 Noctua Edition - Continuing the legacy of acoustic excellence 6-26 screenshot" caption="" alt="Asus RTX 5080 Noctua Edition" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Wh9EZgD8NG9yUioNNgPB3d.png" mos="" link="" align="" fullscreen="" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pinterest-pin-exclude"></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=""><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Noctua)</span></figcaption></figure><p class="fancy-box__body-text"><ul><li><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/desktop-gpu-roadmap-nvidia-rubin-amd-udna-and-intel-xe3-celestial" target="_blank">Desktop Roadmap</a></li><li><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/semiconductors/nvidia-enterprise-roadmap-rubin-rubin-ultra-feynman-and-silicon-photonics" target="_blank">Enterprise Roadmap</a></li><li><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidias-vera-rubin-platform-in-depth-inside-nvidias-most-complex-ai-and-hpc-platform-to-date" target="_blank">Rubin in-depth</a></li><li><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cooling/the-stout-owl-how-i-built-the-ultimate-noctua-g2-pc" target="_blank">The Stout Owl: The ultimate Noctua G2 PC</a></li></ul></p></div></div><p>The biggest news the company is sharing at GDC is that Dynamic Multi Frame Generation, announced back at CES, will be arriving on March 31, along with extended 5x and 6x modes. Unlike the current MFG implementation, which only offers a constant frame rate multiplier, Dynamic MFG can shift gears on the fly in order to maintain a target frame rate. </p><p>All together, Dynamic MFG with 5x and 6x modes will likely be most useful to gamers with high-refresh-rate displays who want to ensure their systems are always hitting the lofty FPS numbers necessary to keep their screens operating near their peak output rates. </p><p>In tandem with the already available <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/nvidia-introduces-dlss-4-5-and-multi-frame-generation-6x-at-ces-2026-updated-models-can-generate-higher-quality-upscaled-frames-and-more-of-them-dynamically">DLSS 4.5</a>, which provides noticeably better image quality than past implementations even at relatively low input resolutions, gamers with RTX 50-series cards will soon have even more tools at their disposal in pursuit of a consistently smooth gaming experience. </p><p>Given the tradeoffs around input latency associated with MFG, now might seem like a natural time for Nvidia to offer an update on its Reflex 2 with Frame Warp latency-reduction tech, which has been stuck in "Coming Soon" status ever since the Blackwell GPU launch over a year ago. That isn't changing any time soon, however, as Nvidia only said to "stay tuned" regarding the technology in our briefing ahead of today's announcements.</p><p>DLSS 4.5 and Dynamic MFG will no doubt prove useful as Nvidia’s developer partners continue to integrate resource-intensive path-traced lighting effects in their titles.  Nvidia says the upcoming <em>Control Resonant </em>and <em>007: First Light </em>will both feature path-traced effects, and those titles will join the recently launched <em>Resident Evil Requiem</em> and the upcoming <em>Pragmata </em>as just a sampling of games that will incorporate these demanding rendering techniques. </p><p>Nvidia is also extending its RTX Mega Geometry technology to help CD Projekt Red create richer forested vistas in the upcoming <em>The Witcher IV</em>. This enhanced version of the tech allows for selective updates of ray-tracing data structures, along with support for finer-grained opacity micromaps, to allow for real-time ray tracing of even such complex scenes as an entire forest.</p><p>RTX Mega Geometry works best on the Blackwell architecture thanks to optimizations in the fourth-generation RT Cores present in those GPUs. <em>The Witcher IV </em>isn’t slated to arrive before 2027, but Blackwell gamers can be just a bit more smug in the meantime about the fact that the RT effects in that title will be optimized for their particular GPUs.</p><p>Generative AI aficionados are also getting a nod at GDC. Most locally generated assets are created through ComfyUI, and while that app’s node-based approach is familiar to those already versed in content-creation pipelines, it can be intimidating for those just dipping their toes into local AI workflows. </p><p>Nvidia has worked with ComfyUI to bring a new, more user-friendly “app view” interface to the table at GDC, and the company also touts the improvements it’s made to resource utilization in some workflows through the creation of better quantizations of models like LTX-2. Thanks to those improvements, creators can iterate more quickly on generative content on a broader range of hardware. </p><p>Even in the absence of new GPUs thus far in 2026, Nvidia’s GDC showing gives RTX 50-series owners a bit of a reason to be excited about being on the cutting edge of both gaming and AI. It’s a bit easier to swallow the absence of faster hardware when existing GPUs can upscale higher-quality frames and generate more of them if higher output frame rates are required, and while DLSS 4.5 works best on both RTX 40-series and 50-series GPUs, MFG remains a Blackwell-exclusive feature. Unless and until the AI chip crunch abates, getting more out of existing hardware is likely to be the way of things for the foreseeable future. </p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Battlefield 6 says no to ray tracing now and in the near future — dev says decision made to ‘focus on making sure it was performance for everyone else’ ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/pc-gaming/battlefield-6-says-no-to-ray-tracing-now-and-in-the-near-future-dev-says-decision-made-to-focus-on-making-sure-it-was-performance-for-everyone-else</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ BF6 dev says that they won't add a ray tracing feature to focus on making the game run great 'for everyone else'. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">nJ8sTdDancjnMX2gvdqijZ</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rYW5BBWKueMDUtqBT4suGg-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sun, 31 Aug 2025 14:35:37 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <category><![CDATA[PC Gaming]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Video Games]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Jowi Morales) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jowi Morales ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gM7E2WSDg2wgCFoaDPz9yK.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jowi Morales is a writer and journalist covering the tech beat since 2021. However, he’s been interested in technology far earlier than that. He started discovering desktop computers when his father brought home a Windows 95 PC, but his first real experience working under the hood of the PC was when the old computer’s hard drive was filled to the brim in the year 2000. He deleted the Windows folder to attempt to rectify the situation, which led to his dad buying a new desktop PC. Since then, he learned a lot more about computers, and he’s always been the go-to tech expert for his family and friends.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Jowi primarily uses a Windows workstation and an Android phone, but he also bought into the Apple ecosystem with the 6th-gen iPad, iPhone 14 Pro Max, and the M1 MacBook Air. Today, Jowi covers hardware and software from Redmond and Cupertino, while also looking at the tech industry in general.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Aside from covering technology, Jowi is an avid photographer and writes about automobiles, aviation, and tanks. You can find his bylines at &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.makeuseof.com/author/jowi-morales/&quot;&gt;MakeUseOf&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.slashgear.com/author/jowimorales/&quot;&gt;SlashGear&lt;/a&gt;, and, of course, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.tomshardware.com/author/jowi-morales&quot;&gt;Tom’s Hardware&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rYW5BBWKueMDUtqBT4suGg-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[EA]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Battlefield 6 open beta]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Battlefield 6 open beta]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Battlefield 6 open beta]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rYW5BBWKueMDUtqBT4suGg-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Battlefield 6 is one of the most anticipated games of the year, more so because of its <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/pc-gaming/battlefield-6s-modest-system-requirements-open-the-doors-to-gamers-of-all-budgets-six-year-old-gpus-meet-minimum-recommendations">friendly system requirements</a> that let it be played even on modest hardware. One of the ways the game’s developers were able to achieve this was by side-stepping any ray tracing technologies. </p><p>“No, we are not going to have ray tracing when the game launches, and we don’t have any plans in the near future for it either,” Studio Technical Director Christian Buhl of Ripple Effect, one of the studios behind BF6, told <a href="https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/battlefield-6-bf6-no-ray-tracing-pc-version/"><em>ComicBook.com</em></a>. “That was because we wanted to focus on performance. We wanted to make sure that all of our effort was focused on making the game as [optimized] as possible for the default settings and the default users. So, we just made the decision relatively early on that we weren’t going to do ray tracing and, again, it was mostly so that we could focus on making sure it was performance for everyone else.”</p><p>This decision means that gamers can easily play the game and get good performance, even when running older hardware. The only unfortunate thing is that the title <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/battlefield-6s-javelin-anti-cheat-secure-boot-requirement-could-kill-its-steam-deck-support">uses EA’s Javelin anti-cheat feature</a>, which requires Secure Boot. This precludes the Steam Deck and other Linux-based devices from running the game, so players avoiding Windows won’t be able to play BF6.</p><p>The Battlefield franchise is Call of Duty’s biggest competitor, and it stands out by having a destructible environment. This makes it more realistic and gives players more tactical choices, especially when facing an entrenched enemy. Since FPS shooters focus more on tactics and gameplay like this, we can consider ray tracing as a rather unnecessary eye-candy feature that will only make the title less accessible to gamers. </p><p>This is similar to Call of Duty: Black Ops 6, which launched last year, and also did not have ray tracing enabled in the game. There is a workaround to force the feature if you have a good enough graphics card, but it might cause some issues.</p><p>Fast-paced games that cater to a massive player base will likely not want to have ray tracing turned on. Aside from the additional strain this feature puts on GPUs, it also means additional backend work for developers. So, by dropping it altogether, the team behind the title can focus more on optimizing the game and making it run great on as many gaming PCs as possible, instead of making the title look better to the privileged few who have powerful GPUs.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Unreal Engine 5.6 promises 60 FPS Ray Tracing on current hardware – features Hardware Ray Tracing enhancements and eliminates CPU bottlenecks ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/unreal-engine-5-6-promises-60-fps-ray-tracing-on-current-hardware-features-hardware-ray-tracing-enhancements-and-eliminates-cpu-bottlenecks</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Epic Games just released Unreal Engine 5.6, which optimizes current hardware to deliver more performance for next-gen games. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">4pQTp8GzH5SqnpZMUurtSK</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rjtEGzvnQPEwqDyeZKKyq5-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2025 12:07:01 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <category><![CDATA[Video Games]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Jowi Morales) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jowi Morales ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gM7E2WSDg2wgCFoaDPz9yK.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jowi Morales is a writer and journalist covering the tech beat since 2021. However, he’s been interested in technology far earlier than that. He started discovering desktop computers when his father brought home a Windows 95 PC, but his first real experience working under the hood of the PC was when the old computer’s hard drive was filled to the brim in the year 2000. He deleted the Windows folder to attempt to rectify the situation, which led to his dad buying a new desktop PC. Since then, he learned a lot more about computers, and he’s always been the go-to tech expert for his family and friends.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Jowi primarily uses a Windows workstation and an Android phone, but he also bought into the Apple ecosystem with the 6th-gen iPad, iPhone 14 Pro Max, and the M1 MacBook Air. Today, Jowi covers hardware and software from Redmond and Cupertino, while also looking at the tech industry in general.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Aside from covering technology, Jowi is an avid photographer and writes about automobiles, aviation, and tanks. You can find his bylines at &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.makeuseof.com/author/jowi-morales/&quot;&gt;MakeUseOf&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.slashgear.com/author/jowimorales/&quot;&gt;SlashGear&lt;/a&gt;, and, of course, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.tomshardware.com/author/jowi-morales&quot;&gt;Tom’s Hardware&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rjtEGzvnQPEwqDyeZKKyq5-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Epic Games]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Unreal Engine 5.6 cover image]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Unreal Engine 5.6 cover image]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Unreal Engine 5.6 cover image]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rjtEGzvnQPEwqDyeZKKyq5-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Epic Games just unleashed Unreal Engine 5.6 (UE 5.6), the latest version of its powerful engine designed for game developers and other professionals. According to <a href="https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/news/unreal-engine-5-6-is-now-available" target="_blank">the company</a>, one of the main targets of this update is to allow current-gen consoles, high-end PCs, and powerful mobile devices to hit 60 fps while using hardware ray tracing. Epic Games achieved this by offloading some tasks from the CPU to the GPU, which allows its Lumen Global Illumination system to achieve higher performance. </p><div class="youtube-video" data-nosnippet ><div class="video-aspect-box"><iframe data-lazy-priority="low" data-lazy-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/eOX40-hZtMM" allowfullscreen></iframe></div></div><p>Aside from this, it also released an experimental module called Fast Geometry Streaming Plugin. This feature aims to improve open-world loading speeds even as developers add more static objects while still maintaining constant frame rates. There’s also asynchronous physics state creation and destruction, which improves the loading of any asset with any kind of in-game physical interaction without interfering with the main processes necessary to run the game. </p><p>The company also said that it has updated the device profiles in UE 5.6, ensuring graphics settings are adjusted automatically for the latest consoles, mobile devices, and PC hardware. All these updates will make it easier for developers to optimize their games and deliver at least 60 fps of gaming performance, even with ray tracing. Epic Games then showed off UE 5.6’s capabilities by previewing The Witcher 4 on PlayStation 5, running out of the box at 60 fps with ray tracing turned on. </p><div class="youtube-video" data-nosnippet ><div class="video-aspect-box"><iframe data-lazy-priority="low" data-lazy-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/aorRfK478RE" allowfullscreen></iframe></div></div>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ First Intel Core 2 and Nvidia RTX 50 gaming experiments disappoint ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpu-drivers/first-intel-core-2-and-nvidia-rtx-50-gaming-experiments-disappoint</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ The system played nicely, but the ‘majority of games’ with RT fell flat. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">tFb7YWkZAeLtZtf73NPpzC</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yPyLW7YUoGP6xPCYGFtjnX-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sun, 18 May 2025 12:20:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:44:13 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPU Drivers]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Mark Tyson ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/56vqMYLDaKRHPhHZgbADFR.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Mark&#039;s enthusiasm for computers dampened at an early age by the rubber-keyed Sinclair Spectrum 48K and feelings of Commodore 64 envy. However, in the mid-80s, hope in a digital future was rekindled by the purchase of an Atari 520 STe. Since that time Mark has used a multitude of computers for fun and professional endeavors. He often owned both Macs and PCs but went cold on the former after OS9 was killed off, and warmed to the latter with the introduction of Windows XP.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Early work years were spent in artwork and reprographics but in the late noughties, Mark started to blog about computers, Taiwanese food culture, and guitar design. This activity led to a full-time position writing about breaking PC tech news for HEXUS, for the best part of a decade. When HEXUS was abruptly closed, Mark helped with the foundation of Club386, before finding a new home at Tom&#039;s Hardware.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
When not wearing through the keycap legends on his PC keyboards, Mark can be found wandering the computer malls of Taiwan&#039;s neon-lit conurbations and enjoying local and international cuisine.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yPyLW7YUoGP6xPCYGFtjnX-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Nvidia]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Nvidia RTX 5090 is Doomed]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Nvidia RTX 5090 is Doomed]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Nvidia RTX 5090 is Doomed]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yPyLW7YUoGP6xPCYGFtjnX-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Earlier in the week, we reported on an Nvidia driver change which opened up <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpu-drivers/rtx-5090-with-core-2-duo-nvidia-driver-change-opens-up-bizarre-system-build-options" target="_blank">crazy new possibilities for PC DIYers</a>. However, the dreams of Intel Core 2 system makers enjoying outlandish high jinks with Nvidia RTX50 GPUs have now partially evaporated. Twitter(X)-based tech enthusiast Bob Pony, who first surfaced the driver change, is back, but his tales of “struggles,” aren’t exactly the news we wanted to hear.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="HXhCA3g94sYBPZe7xZWenX" name="Pony-core-2-quad" alt="Nvidia RTX 50 with Intel Core 2 system" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HXhCA3g94sYBPZe7xZWenX.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1920" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HXhCA3g94sYBPZe7xZWenX.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: <a href="https://x.com/TheBobPony/status/1923520700020572588" target="_blank">Bob Pony</a>)</span></figcaption></figure><p>To recap, the latest Nvidia GeForce driver re-enabled support for Intel processors dating back to the Core 2 era, as it no longer required CPU support for the POPCNT instruction. That is all well and good, and Pony took to Twitter yesterday to “happily confirm that it's possible to use an NVIDIA RTX 50 series graphics card in an old system such as an Intel Core 2 Quad.” Specifically, they partnered their old Core 2 Quad Q9450 with an unashamedly modern <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-5060-ti-16gb-review">RTX 5060 Ti</a>. “It works!” Pony celebrated, and tipped followers to avoid trying the same with an <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-rtx-5060-ti-8gb-loses-up-to-10-percent-performance-when-using-pcie-4-0">RTX 5060 non-Ti</a> due to its PCIe x8 interface.</p><p>What happened next is that Pony quickly went from fiddling around in Windows 11 to trying to get some modern games running on their May-to-September combo. </p><div class="see-more see-more--clipped"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet hawk-ignore" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The struggles of using a Core 2 Quad paired with NVIDIA RTX 5060 Ti... can't play majority of games that use ray tracing due to the processor lacking some instruction sets required for the game to run. 🫠 pic.twitter.com/XcwZFxhHXS<a href="https://twitter.com/cantworkitout/status/1923836138160103470">May 17, 2025</a></p></blockquote><div class="see-more__filter"></div></div>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ The GPU benchmarks hierarchy 2026: Ten years of graphics card hardware tested and ranked ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Our GPU benchmarks hierarchy ranks all the current and previous generation graphics cards based on real-world gaming tests. Find out how the latest GPUs from Nvidia, AMD, and Intel stack up, with this comprehensive look at over 80 GPUs from the past decade. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">L8SfcAV5o28ayEFjzq6cfX</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tFPr7eEvykcUxHKw9WfWkE-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2025 16:14:08 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Fri, 26 Jun 2026 03:24:42 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jeffrey Kampman ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8JCjGs5yVZds2YdKmzjUDE.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jeff Kampman has been playing PC games ever since he learned how to fire up freeware CDs from the DOS command line. He started building his own PCs in the mid-aughts and later turned that passion into a career, working as a news and guides writer, reviewer, and ultimately Editor-in-Chief at The Tech Report, where he dove deep on CPUs and GPUs (and more) in pursuit of the smoothest gaming experiences around. Jeff later took on roles at Asus and Intel as a technical marketer before joining Tom&#039;s Hardware. As Senior Analyst, Graphics, Jeff covers everything from integrated graphics processors to discrete graphics cards to the massive data center GPU installations powering our AI future. Jeff is also a hobbyist photographer, Twitch streamer, espresso enthusiast, and runner.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tFPr7eEvykcUxHKw9WfWkE-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Tom&#039;s Hardware]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[GPU Benchmarks and Performance Hierarchy]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[GPU Benchmarks and Performance Hierarchy]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[GPU Benchmarks and Performance Hierarchy]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tFPr7eEvykcUxHKw9WfWkE-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-gpu-benchmarks-introduction"><span>GPU Benchmarks Introduction</span></h3><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">GPU Benchmarks & Performance Hierarchy</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text"><ul><li><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">The Best GPU for Gaming</a></li><li><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-buying-guide,5844.html">GPU Buying Guide</a></li><li><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/best-gaming-graphics-card-gpu-deals-now-2025">Best GPU Deals</a></li><li><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-5050-vs-intel-arc-b580-face-off">Nvidia GeForce RTX 5050 vs Intel Arc B580 Face Off</a></li><li><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus">All GPU Content</a></li></ul></p></div></div><p>Tom's Hardware exhaustively benchmarks every GPU to find out which are worthy of our list of <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html" target="_blank">the best graphics cards</a>. 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 <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html" target="_blank">the best CPUs for gaming</a> take a secondary role.</p><p>Our 2026 GPU Hierarchy testing spans three generations of Nvidia and AMD graphics cards, as well as Intel's Arc B-series GPUs.</p><p>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.</p><p>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. <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-radeon-rx-9070-gre-review" target="_blank">Check out that coverage for all the details. </a></p><p>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. </p><p>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.</p><p>Let's dive into our ranking of GPUs past and present so you can figure out how all those cards stack up.</p><h2 id="prime-day-exceptional-graphics-card-deals">Prime Day exceptional graphics card deals</h2><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="6daf14e6-c7e3-422f-b507-36eff59cbaf0" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Get this triple-fan RX 9060 XT at a low price and enjoy enough VRAM to play the latest games at 1080p and 1440p with aplomb. Be sure to grab the on-page promo code for the lowest price." data-dimension48="Get this triple-fan RX 9060 XT at a low price and enjoy enough VRAM to play the latest games at 1080p and 1440p with aplomb. Be sure to grab the on-page promo code for the lowest price." data-dimension25="$399.99" href="https://www.newegg.com/gigabyte-gv-r9060xtgaming-oc-16gd-radeon-rx-9060-xt-16gb-graphics-card-triple-fans/p/N82E16814932806" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:93.83%;"><img id="RjKXcrpB5dz9bEMjRJQWWS" name="RX 9060 XT 16GB Gaming" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RjKXcrpB5dz9bEMjRJQWWS.webp" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1280" height="1201" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p>Get this triple-fan RX 9060 XT at a low price and enjoy enough VRAM to play the latest games at 1080p and 1440p with aplomb. Be sure to grab the on-page promo code for the lowest price. <a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/gigabyte-gv-r9060xtgaming-oc-16gd-radeon-rx-9060-xt-16gb-graphics-card-triple-fans/p/N82E16814932806" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="6daf14e6-c7e3-422f-b507-36eff59cbaf0" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Get this triple-fan RX 9060 XT at a low price and enjoy enough VRAM to play the latest games at 1080p and 1440p with aplomb. Be sure to grab the on-page promo code for the lowest price." data-dimension48="Get this triple-fan RX 9060 XT at a low price and enjoy enough VRAM to play the latest games at 1080p and 1440p with aplomb. Be sure to grab the on-page promo code for the lowest price." data-dimension25="$399.99">View Deal</a></p></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="81b8dcfa-e629-4f24-97ba-ed3ba9c6d8f6" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="The RTX 5070 is our pick for the best midrange graphics card thanks to solid baseline performance and theboost offered by DLSS 4.5 tech, and this PNY RTX 5070 delivers everything you need and nothing you don't to enjoy elite 1080p and great 1440p gaming experiences." data-dimension48="The RTX 5070 is our pick for the best midrange graphics card thanks to solid baseline performance and theboost offered by DLSS 4.5 tech, and this PNY RTX 5070 delivers everything you need and nothing you don't to enjoy elite 1080p and great 1440p gaming experiences." data-dimension25="$599.99" href="https://www.walmart.com/ip/PNY-GeForce-RTX-5070-Overclocked-Triple-Fan-Graphics-DLSS-4-Video-Card/15371260951" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:935px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:45.88%;"><img id="p3b84T6RJJ4gWCBTvVP7Bb" name="PNY 5070" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/p3b84T6RJJ4gWCBTvVP7Bb.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="935" height="429" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p>The RTX 5070 is our pick for the best midrange graphics card thanks to solid baseline performance and theboost offered by DLSS 4.5 tech, and this PNY RTX 5070 delivers everything you need and nothing you don't to enjoy elite 1080p and great 1440p gaming experiences. <a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.walmart.com/ip/PNY-GeForce-RTX-5070-Overclocked-Triple-Fan-Graphics-DLSS-4-Video-Card/15371260951" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="81b8dcfa-e629-4f24-97ba-ed3ba9c6d8f6" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="The RTX 5070 is our pick for the best midrange graphics card thanks to solid baseline performance and theboost offered by DLSS 4.5 tech, and this PNY RTX 5070 delivers everything you need and nothing you don't to enjoy elite 1080p and great 1440p gaming experiences." data-dimension48="The RTX 5070 is our pick for the best midrange graphics card thanks to solid baseline performance and theboost offered by DLSS 4.5 tech, and this PNY RTX 5070 delivers everything you need and nothing you don't to enjoy elite 1080p and great 1440p gaming experiences." data-dimension25="$599.99">View Deal</a></p></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="fbefccab-5080-4dd0-9d62-c38fb99a1340" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="This PowerColor RX 9070 is the exact model we use in our reviews, and we can attest to its quiet cooler and great performance for 1440p and even 4K gaming. 16GB of VRAM provides peace of mind, and you can boost performance as you wish with FSR 4 upscaling and framegen." data-dimension48="This PowerColor RX 9070 is the exact model we use in our reviews, and we can attest to its quiet cooler and great performance for 1440p and even 4K gaming. 16GB of VRAM provides peace of mind, and you can boost performance as you wish with FSR 4 upscaling and framegen." data-dimension25="$559.99" href="https://computers.woot.com/offers/powercolor-reaper-amd-radeon-rx-9070-16gb-1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:679px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:72.90%;"><img id="yPzWoJjpzD6qFBk3hJ5QkE" name="51KS+A63CYL._AC_SX679_" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yPzWoJjpzD6qFBk3hJ5QkE.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="679" height="495" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p>This PowerColor RX 9070 is the exact model we use in our reviews, and we can attest to its quiet cooler and great performance for 1440p and even 4K gaming. 16GB of VRAM provides peace of mind, and you can boost performance as you wish with FSR 4 upscaling and framegen. <a class="view-deal button" href="https://computers.woot.com/offers/powercolor-reaper-amd-radeon-rx-9070-16gb-1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="fbefccab-5080-4dd0-9d62-c38fb99a1340" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="This PowerColor RX 9070 is the exact model we use in our reviews, and we can attest to its quiet cooler and great performance for 1440p and even 4K gaming. 16GB of VRAM provides peace of mind, and you can boost performance as you wish with FSR 4 upscaling and framegen." data-dimension48="This PowerColor RX 9070 is the exact model we use in our reviews, and we can attest to its quiet cooler and great performance for 1440p and even 4K gaming. 16GB of VRAM provides peace of mind, and you can boost performance as you wish with FSR 4 upscaling and framegen." data-dimension25="$559.99">View Deal</a></p></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="c282bb78-e4ba-47c3-bc8c-5f7176821f60" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="MSI's Ventus 3X OC RTX 5070 Ti is a relatively compact triple-fan design that occupies about 2.5 slots. Its stealthy shroud will complement any build. Grab the on-page promo code for the lowest price." data-dimension48="MSI's Ventus 3X OC RTX 5070 Ti is a relatively compact triple-fan design that occupies about 2.5 slots. Its stealthy shroud will complement any build. Grab the on-page promo code for the lowest price." data-dimension25="$884.99" href="https://www.newegg.com/msi-rtx-5070-ti-16g-ventus-3x-oc-geforce-rtx-5070-ti-16gb-graphics-card-triple-fans/p/N82E16814137933" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:76.25%;"><img id="5TUGb6xScipeQTVsqGpYXg" name="msi-geforce-rtx-5070-12g-ventus-3x-oc-gr-8def5f25-9670-40bd-926b-2dbbd1838a35.jpg" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5TUGb6xScipeQTVsqGpYXg.webp" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1280" height="976" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p>MSI's Ventus 3X OC RTX 5070 Ti is a relatively compact triple-fan design that occupies about 2.5 slots. Its stealthy shroud will complement any build. Grab the on-page promo code for the lowest price. <a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/msi-rtx-5070-ti-16g-ventus-3x-oc-geforce-rtx-5070-ti-16gb-graphics-card-triple-fans/p/N82E16814137933" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="c282bb78-e4ba-47c3-bc8c-5f7176821f60" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="MSI's Ventus 3X OC RTX 5070 Ti is a relatively compact triple-fan design that occupies about 2.5 slots. Its stealthy shroud will complement any build. Grab the on-page promo code for the lowest price." data-dimension48="MSI's Ventus 3X OC RTX 5070 Ti is a relatively compact triple-fan design that occupies about 2.5 slots. Its stealthy shroud will complement any build. Grab the on-page promo code for the lowest price." data-dimension25="$884.99">View Deal</a></p></div><p><em>These are a few of the standout deals from Amazon's 2026 Prime Day event, which is currently taking place. Be sure to </em><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/best-gaming-graphics-card-gpu-deals" target="_blank"><em>check out our full list of the best Prime Day graphics card deals, too</em></a><em>. The GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy continues below.</em></p><p>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. </p><p>The results are all collected at native resolution, without enabling DLSS, FSR, or XeSS upscaling or frame generation. </p><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">June 2026 Update</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text">This update includes complete 2026 gaming data for 48 GPUs across 19 separate tests, including eight RT titles. We've retested three generations each of GeForce and Radeon cards, as well as Intel's Arc Battlemage products.</p></div></div><p>As a brief refresher of the cards in this version of our hierarchy, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-blackwell-architecture-deep-dive-a-closer-look-at-the-upgrades-coming-with-rtx-50-series-gpus" target="_blank">Nvidia's cutting-edge Blackwell architecture</a> 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.</p><p>Even if you're not into framegen, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-dlss-4-is-the-magic-bullet-behind-the-rtx-50-series-touted-2x-performance-reflex-2-multi-frame-gen-ai-tools-come-to-the-fore" target="_blank">DLSS 4.5 upscaling and its transformer neural network architecture</a> 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. </p><p>Nvidia's <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/nvidia-ada-lovelace-and-geforce-rtx-40-series-everything-we-know">Ada Lovelace architecture</a> 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. </p><p>AMD's Radeon RX 9000 series cards, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-rdna4-rx-9000-series-gpus-specifications-pricing-release-date" target="_blank">powered by its latest RDNA 4 architecture</a>, 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. </p><p>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. </p><p>Meanwhile, the last-gen <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-radeon-rx-7000-rdna-3-price-performance-benchmarks-release-date">RDNA 3 architecture</a> 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. </p><p>Intel's <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/intel-battlemage-arc-b-series-gpus-everything-we-know" target="_blank">Battlemage</a>-powered Arc B580 and Arc B570 offer major improvements in performance and efficiency compared to its <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-arc-alchemist-release-date-specs-pricing-all-we-know" target="_blank">Alchemist architecture</a>. 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. <br><br>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. <br><br>The following tables sort everything solely by our performance-based GPU benchmarks, from fastest to slowest. Factors including real-world pricing, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/graphics-card-power-consumption-tested">graphics card power consumption</a>, 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.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-gpu-benchmarks-hierarchy-2026-the-tests"><span>GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026: The tests </span></h3><p>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. <br><br>All the scores are expressed as percentages relative to the top-ranking 1080p ultra card, which is of course the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-5090-review">GeForce RTX 5090</a>.<br><br>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 (<em>DOOM: The Dark Ages </em>and <em>Indiana Jones and the Great Circle</em>) or look best with RT (<em>Assassin's Creed Shadows </em>and <em>Grand Theft Auto V Enhanced</em>.) </p><ul><li><em>Black Myth Wukong</em> (+RT)</li><li><em>Alan Wake II </em>(+RT)</li><li><em>Apex Legends</em></li><li><em>Counter-Strike 2 </em></li><li><em>Fortnite</em></li><li><em>Arc Raiders</em></li><li><em>Stalker 2</em></li><li><em>DOOM: The Dark Ages </em>(RT required)</li><li><em>Grand Theft Auto V Enhanced </em>(RT only)<em> </em></li><li><em>Marvel's Spider-Man 2 </em>(+RT)</li><li><em>Indiana Jones and the Great Circle </em>(RT required)</li><li><em>Marvel Rivals</em></li><li><em>Assassin's Creed Shadows </em>(RT only)</li><li><em>Cyberpunk 2077 </em>(+RT)<em> </em></li><li><em>Clair Obscur: Expedition 33</em></li></ul><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-gpu-benchmarks-hierarchy-2026-raster-gaming"><span>GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026: Raster gaming </span></h3><p>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.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/77yhF8ajKTTosserzsARYN.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Raster Gaming " /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cCbGspLq5yrwLNtkmB8vYN.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Raster Gaming " /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oUxzMouhsE3X4GJbF62FZN.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Raster Gaming " /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="rasterization-gpu-benchmarks-key-findings">Rasterization GPU Benchmarks, Key Findings</h2><ul><li>Unsurprisingly, the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-5090-review">RTX 5090</a> 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.</li><li>Among current cards, the RX 9060 XT 8GB and RTX 5060 duke it out for the best performance per dollar at 1080p.</li><li>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.</li><li>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.</li></ul><p>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. </p><p>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.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-rasterization-gpu-benchmarks-rankings-2026"><span>Rasterization GPU Benchmarks Rankings 2026</span></h3><div ><table><caption>GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy — Rasterization Performance</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p>Graphics Card</p></th><th  ><p>MSRP</p></th><th  ><p>1080p Ultra</p></th><th  ><p>1440p Ultra</p></th><th  ><p>4K Ultra</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5090" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>1999.99</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (203.8)</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (167.3)</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (110.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4090" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>1599.99</p></td><td  ><p>90.1% (183.6)</p></td><td  ><p>85.7% (143.4)</p></td><td  ><p>80.4% (89.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5080" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>999.99</p></td><td  ><p>81.9% (166.9)</p></td><td  ><p>76.7% (128.3)</p></td><td  ><p>69.8% (77.4)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7900+XTX" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 XTX</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>999.99</p></td><td  ><p>79.3% (161.5)</p></td><td  ><p>73.1% (122.3)</p></td><td  ><p>63.7% (70.6)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4080+Super" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4080 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>999.99</p></td><td  ><p>78.0% (158.9)</p></td><td  ><p>70.9% (118.6)</p></td><td  ><p>62.6% (69.4)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4080" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>1199.99</p></td><td  ><p>77.2% (157.3)</p></td><td  ><p>70.3% (117.5)</p></td><td  ><p>60.9% (67.5)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5070+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>749.99</p></td><td  ><p>76.2% (155.4)</p></td><td  ><p>69.8% (116.8)</p></td><td  ><p>61.9% (68.6)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+9070+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 9070 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>599.99</p></td><td  ><p>76.9% (156.6)</p></td><td  ><p>69.7% (116.5)</p></td><td  ><p>59.4% (65.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7900+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>899.99</p></td><td  ><p>71.3% (145.4)</p></td><td  ><p>64.6% (108.0)</p></td><td  ><p>54.0% (59.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Ti+Super" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>799.99</p></td><td  ><p>69.3% (141.2)</p></td><td  ><p>62.1% (104.0)</p></td><td  ><p>52.8% (58.5)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+9070" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 9070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>549.99</p></td><td  ><p>69.1% (140.9)</p></td><td  ><p>62.1% (104.0)</p></td><td  ><p>52.1% (57.7)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3090+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3090 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>1999.99</p></td><td  ><p>64.7% (131.7)</p></td><td  ><p>59.7% (99.9)</p></td><td  ><p>53.5% (59.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>799.99</p></td><td  ><p>66.3% (135.1)</p></td><td  ><p>58.6% (97.9)</p></td><td  ><p>48.6% (53.9)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5070" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>549.99</p></td><td  ><p>65.1% (132.6)</p></td><td  ><p>57.6% (96.4)</p></td><td  ><p>49.0% (54.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3090" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>1499.99</p></td><td  ><p>60.3% (122.9)</p></td><td  ><p>54.7% (91.5)</p></td><td  ><p>47.9% (53.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Super" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>599.99</p></td><td  ><p>62.2% (126.7)</p></td><td  ><p>54.5% (91.2)</p></td><td  ><p>44.4% (49.2)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6950+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6950 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>1099.99</p></td><td  ><p>60.5% (123.3)</p></td><td  ><p>53.5% (89.5)</p></td><td  ><p>43.6% (48.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3080+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>1199.99</p></td><td  ><p>58.7% (119.6)</p></td><td  ><p>53.3% (89.1)</p></td><td  ><p>46.0% (51.0)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+9070+GRE" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 9070 GRE</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>549.99</p></td><td  ><p>59.2% (120.6)</p></td><td  ><p>51.8% (86.6)</p></td><td  ><p>41.8% (46.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7800+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7800 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>499.99</p></td><td  ><p>58.1% (118.4)</p></td><td  ><p>50.7% (84.7)</p></td><td  ><p>40.7% (45.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6900+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>999.99</p></td><td  ><p>57.4% (117.1)</p></td><td  ><p>50.2% (83.9)</p></td><td  ><p>40.5% (44.9)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3080" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>699.99</p></td><td  ><p>54.8% (111.6)</p></td><td  ><p>49.0% (82.0)</p></td><td  ><p>39.6% (43.9)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6800+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6800 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>649.99</p></td><td  ><p>54.9% (111.8)</p></td><td  ><p>47.6% (79.6)</p></td><td  ><p>38.1% (42.2)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4070" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>549.99</p></td><td  ><p>54.7% (111.5)</p></td><td  ><p>46.5% (77.8)</p></td><td  ><p>37.2% (41.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5060+Ti+16GB" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>429.99</p></td><td  ><p>51.6% (105.2)</p></td><td  ><p>43.9% (73.4)</p></td><td  ><p>36.3% (40.2)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7700+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>449.99</p></td><td  ><p>50.5% (102.9)</p></td><td  ><p>43.4% (72.7)</p></td><td  ><p>34.3% (38.0)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+9060+XT+16GB" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 9060 XT 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>349.99</p></td><td  ><p>48.2% (98.3)</p></td><td  ><p>40.2% (67.3)</p></td><td  ><p>31.7% (35.2)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5060+Ti+8GB" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>379.99</p></td><td  ><p>49.3% (100.4)</p></td><td  ><p>41.0% (68.6)</p></td><td  ><p>25.4% (28.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3070+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>599.99</p></td><td  ><p>46.4% (94.6)</p></td><td  ><p>40.0% (66.9)</p></td><td  ><p>23.5% (26.0)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+9060+XT+8GB" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>299.99</p></td><td  ><p>45.7% (93.2)</p></td><td  ><p>37.3% (62.5)</p></td><td  ><p>26.8% (29.7)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4060+Ti+16GB" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>499.99</p></td><td  ><p>43.8% (89.3)</p></td><td  ><p>36.2% (60.5)</p></td><td  ><p>28.2% (31.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7600+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>329.99</p></td><td  ><p>50.1% (102.1)</p></td><td  ><p>30.0% (50.2)</p></td><td  ><p>23.1% (25.5)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3070" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>499.99</p></td><td  ><p>42.8% (87.2)</p></td><td  ><p>34.8% (58.2)</p></td><td  ><p>23.6% (26.2)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4060+Ti+8GB" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>399.99</p></td><td  ><p>43.2% (88.0)</p></td><td  ><p>35.2% (58.9)</p></td><td  ><p>21.5% (23.9)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6750+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6750 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>549.99</p></td><td  ><p>40.8% (83.2)</p></td><td  ><p>34.4% (57.6)</p></td><td  ><p>26.7% (29.6)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5060" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>299.99</p></td><td  ><p>43.4% (88.5)</p></td><td  ><p>35.8% (59.8)</p></td><td  ><p>19.6% (21.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6700+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>479.99</p></td><td  ><p>38.9% (79.2)</p></td><td  ><p>32.5% (54.3)</p></td><td  ><p>25.3% (28.0)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Intel+Arc+B580" target="_blank"><strong>Intel Arc B580</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>249.99</p></td><td  ><p>35.1% (71.5)</p></td><td  ><p>30.3% (50.7)</p></td><td  ><p>24.9% (27.6)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3060+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3060 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>399.99</p></td><td  ><p>36.4% (74.2)</p></td><td  ><p>30.5% (51.0)</p></td><td  ><p>17.5% (19.4)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4060" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>299.99</p></td><td  ><p>35.1% (71.5)</p></td><td  ><p>28.4% (47.6)</p></td><td  ><p>15.7% (17.4)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7600" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7600</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>269.99</p></td><td  ><p>34.3% (69.9)</p></td><td  ><p>27.2% (45.4)</p></td><td  ><p>16.6% (18.4)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5050" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5050</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>249.99</p></td><td  ><p>34.0% (69.3)</p></td><td  ><p>27.1% (45.2)</p></td><td  ><p>15.4% (17.0)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Intel+Arc+B570" target="_blank"><strong>Intel Arc B570</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>219.99</p></td><td  ><p>31.1% (63.5)</p></td><td  ><p>26.5% (44.3)</p></td><td  ><p>17.7% (19.6)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3060+12GB" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3060 12GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>329.99</p></td><td  ><p>30.2% (61.5)</p></td><td  ><p>25.0% (41.9)</p></td><td  ><p>20.0% (22.2)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6650+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6650 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>399.99</p></td><td  ><p>31.5% (64.3)</p></td><td  ><p>22.7% (38.0)</p></td><td  ><p>17.1% (19.0)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6600+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>379.99</p></td><td  ><p>30.8% (62.7)</p></td><td  ><p>24.3% (40.7)</p></td><td  ><p>15.6% (17.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6600" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6600</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>329.99</p></td><td  ><p>25.5% (51.9)</p></td><td  ><p>14.9% (24.8)</p></td><td  ><p>13.1% (14.5)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3050" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3050</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>249.99</p></td><td  ><p>21.9% (44.6)</p></td><td  ><p>17.8% (29.8)</p></td><td  ><p>11.4% (12.6)</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>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.</p><p>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 <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html" target="_blank">best gaming CPUs</a>, like the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-7-9800x3d-review-devastating-gaming-performance" target="_blank">Ryzen 7 9800X3D</a>, can only do so much when a powerful card becomes CPU-bound. </p><p>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. </p><p>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. </p><p>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 <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gaming-monitors,4533.html" target="_blank">the best gaming monitors</a> for a potential upgrade if you're still rocking a 1080p 60 Hz display from the 2010s.</p><p>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. </p><p>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. </p><p>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 <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html" target="_blank">best graphics card picks</a> after our 2026 retests. </p><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-radeon-rx-9070-gre-review" target="_blank">The recently introduced RX 9070 GRE</a> 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. </p><p>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.</p><p>The RX 9060 XT 16GB  holds down the entry-midrange 16GB position by itself, and its $459 price tag isn't <em>so </em>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. </p><p>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. </p><p>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. </p><p>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). </p><p>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. </p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3840px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="ybX9f4CedFGQKEuGreXGXA" name="2160p PT 1" alt="Comparison screenshot for Pragmata RT vs PT" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ybX9f4CedFGQKEuGreXGXA.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="3840" height="2160" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="caption-text">Pragmata </span><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Future)</span></figcaption></figure><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-ray-tracing-gpu-benchmarks-2026"><span>Ray Tracing GPU Benchmarks 2026</span></h3><p>For 2026, we're testing a range of RT titles that present a progressively more difficult workload to the GPUs under test. </p><p><em>Grand Theft Auto V Enhanced</em>, <em>DOOM: The Dark Ages</em>, and <em>Indiana Jones and the Great Circle </em>are all relatively lightweight RT titles that will run on a wide range of RT-ready hardware. <em>Spider-Man 2</em>, <em>Cyberpunk 2077</em>, and <em>Assassin's Creed Shadows </em>represent greater challenges to compute resources, VRAM, or both. And <em>Black Myth Wukong </em>and <em>Alan Wake II </em>still bring even the most powerful graphics cards to their knees at native resolutions. </p><p>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. </p><p>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. </p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FaLNjDeMw53EarPU8rK5YJ.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - RT Performance" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RFGzsAft8vmdw53AsRVyXJ.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - RT Performance" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qijRhhx3r3eghXJxub74YJ.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - RT Performance" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="ray-tracing-gpu-benchmarks-key-findings-and-notes">Ray Tracing GPU Benchmarks, Key Findings and Notes</h2><ul><li>The <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-5090-review">RTX 5090</a> really comes into its own with RT enabled, as expected.</li><li>AMD's <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-radeon-rx-9070-xt-review/2">RX 9070 XT</a> outperforms the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top/4">RX 7900 XTX</a> in our RT tests, showing that the ray-tracing improvements in RDNA 4 deliver.</li><li>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.</li><li>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:<ul><li>an RTX 5060 Ti 16GB, RTX 5070, or RX 9070 GRE to handle ~60 FPS RT at 1080p without running out of VRAM</li><li>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</li><li>An RTX 5080, RTX 4090, or RTX 5090 at 4K </li></ul></li></ul><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-ray-tracing-gpu-benchmarks-rankings-2026"><span>Ray Tracing GPU Benchmarks Rankings 2026</span></h3><div ><table><caption>GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy — Ray Tracing Performance</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p>Graphics Card</p></th><th  ><p>MSRP</p></th><th  ><p>1080p Ultra</p></th><th  ><p>1440p Ultra</p></th><th  ><p>4K Ultra</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+5090" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$1,999.99</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (125.7)</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (100.8)</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (64.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+4090" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$1,599.99</p></td><td  ><p>89.4% (112.3)</p></td><td  ><p>87.0% (87.7)</p></td><td  ><p>81.4% (52.2)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+5080" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$999.99</p></td><td  ><p>78.2% (98.3)</p></td><td  ><p>73.4% (74.0)</p></td><td  ><p>65.7% (42.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+4080+Super" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4080 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$999.99</p></td><td  ><p>75.0% (94.3)</p></td><td  ><p>68.9% (69.5)</p></td><td  ><p>60.1% (38.5)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+4080" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$1,199.99</p></td><td  ><p>73.9% (92.8)</p></td><td  ><p>67.8% (68.4)</p></td><td  ><p>58.3% (37.4)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+5070+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$749.99</p></td><td  ><p>71.9% (90.4)</p></td><td  ><p>65.7% (66.2)</p></td><td  ><p>57.3% (36.7)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Ti+Super" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$799.99</p></td><td  ><p>69.9% (87.9)</p></td><td  ><p>59.5% (60.0)</p></td><td  ><p>50.2% (32.2)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+9070+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 9070 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$599.99</p></td><td  ><p>61.9% (77.8)</p></td><td  ><p>55.1% (55.5)</p></td><td  ><p>47.0% (30.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$799.99</p></td><td  ><p>62.4% (78.5)</p></td><td  ><p>54.8% (55.3)</p></td><td  ><p>37.2% (23.9)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+3090+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3090 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$1,999.99</p></td><td  ><p>57.5% (72.3)</p></td><td  ><p>51.8% (52.2)</p></td><td  ><p>45.8% (29.4)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+5070" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$549.99</p></td><td  ><p>58.9% (74.1)</p></td><td  ><p>51.1% (51.5)</p></td><td  ><p>35.4% (22.7)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+7900+XTX" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 XTX</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$999.99</p></td><td  ><p>56.0% (70.4)</p></td><td  ><p>50.1% (50.5)</p></td><td  ><p>42.6% (27.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+9070" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 9070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$549.99</p></td><td  ><p>53.8% (67.6)</p></td><td  ><p>47.2% (47.6)</p></td><td  ><p>40.2% (25.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+3090" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$1,499.99</p></td><td  ><p>52.9% (66.5)</p></td><td  ><p>47.0% (47.4)</p></td><td  ><p>41.0% (26.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Super" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$599.99</p></td><td  ><p>57.7% (72.5)</p></td><td  ><p>43.2% (43.6)</p></td><td  ><p>34.4% (22.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+3080+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$1,199.99</p></td><td  ><p>51.4% (64.6)</p></td><td  ><p>45.8% (46.2)</p></td><td  ><p>28.1% (18.0)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+7900+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$899.99</p></td><td  ><p>49.1% (61.7)</p></td><td  ><p>43.1% (43.5)</p></td><td  ><p>36.0% (23.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+4070" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$549.99</p></td><td  ><p>50.7% (63.8)</p></td><td  ><p>38.3% (38.6)</p></td><td  ><p>30.1% (19.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+5060+Ti+16GB" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$429.99</p></td><td  ><p>44.7% (56.2)</p></td><td  ><p>38.6% (38.9)</p></td><td  ><p>32.1% (20.6)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+9070+GRE" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 9070 GRE</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$549.99</p></td><td  ><p>46.5% (58.4)</p></td><td  ><p>37.0% (37.3)</p></td><td  ><p>24.2% (15.5)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+3080" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$699.99</p></td><td  ><p>40.8% (51.3)</p></td><td  ><p>34.4% (34.7)</p></td><td  ><p>21.5% (13.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+4060+Ti+16GB" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$499.99</p></td><td  ><p>38.4% (48.3)</p></td><td  ><p>32.5% (32.7)</p></td><td  ><p>26.3% (16.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+7800+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7800 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$499.99</p></td><td  ><p>38.5% (48.4)</p></td><td  ><p>33.3% (33.5)</p></td><td  ><p>23.5% (15.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+6950+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6950 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$1,099.99</p></td><td  ><p>37.3% (46.9)</p></td><td  ><p>32.6% (32.8)</p></td><td  ><p>24.3% (15.6)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+6900+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$999.99</p></td><td  ><p>36.0% (45.2)</p></td><td  ><p>31.8% (32.1)</p></td><td  ><p>23.6% (15.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+9060+XT+16GB" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 9060 XT 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$349.99</p></td><td  ><p>36.0% (45.3)</p></td><td  ><p>30.8% (31.0)</p></td><td  ><p>23.3% (14.9)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+6800+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6800 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$649.99</p></td><td  ><p>33.4% (42.0)</p></td><td  ><p>29.4% (29.6)</p></td><td  ><p>21.9% (14.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+5060+Ti+8GB" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$379.99</p></td><td  ><p>36.6% (46.0)</p></td><td  ><p>26.3% (26.6)</p></td><td  ><p>11.3% (7.2)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+3070+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$599.99</p></td><td  ><p>33.5% (42.1)</p></td><td  ><p>27.5% (27.7)</p></td><td  ><p>13.7% (8.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+7700+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$449.99</p></td><td  ><p>33.1% (41.6)</p></td><td  ><p>25.1% (25.3)</p></td><td  ><p>15.2% (9.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+4060+Ti+8GB" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$399.99</p></td><td  ><p>32.5% (40.8)</p></td><td  ><p>25.5% (25.7)</p></td><td  ><p>12.6% (8.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+3070" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$499.99</p></td><td  ><p>31.6% (39.7)</p></td><td  ><p>26.0% (26.2)</p></td><td  ><p>12.9% (8.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+5060" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$299.99</p></td><td  ><p>32.6% (40.9)</p></td><td  ><p>24.4% (24.6)</p></td><td  ><p>10.7% (6.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+3060+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3060 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$399.99</p></td><td  ><p>26.4% (33.2)</p></td><td  ><p>22.2% (22.3)</p></td><td  ><p>11.5% (7.4)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Intel+Arc+B580" target="_blank"><strong>Intel Arc B580</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$249.99</p></td><td  ><p>27.7% (34.9)</p></td><td  ><p>22.9% (23.1)</p></td><td  ><p>5.9% (3.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+4060" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$299.99</p></td><td  ><p>26.7% (33.6)</p></td><td  ><p>21.1% (21.3)</p></td><td  ><p>10.6% (6.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+3060+12GB" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3060 12GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$329.99</p></td><td  ><p>24.2% (30.4)</p></td><td  ><p>20.6% (20.7)</p></td><td  ><p>14.8% (9.5)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+9060+XT+8GB" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$299.99</p></td><td  ><p>26.3% (33.0)</p></td><td  ><p>20.1% (20.2)</p></td><td  ><p>11.4% (7.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+5050" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5050</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$249.99</p></td><td  ><p>24.9% (31.2)</p></td><td  ><p>18.5% (18.7)</p></td><td  ><p>9.6% (6.2)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+6750+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6750 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$549.99</p></td><td  ><p>22.6% (28.5)</p></td><td  ><p>18.9% (19.1)</p></td><td  ><p>12.7% (8.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+7600+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$329.99</p></td><td  ><p>21.4% (27.0)</p></td><td  ><p>18.0% (18.1)</p></td><td  ><p>13.2% (8.5)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+6700+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$479.99</p></td><td  ><p>21.6% (27.1)</p></td><td  ><p>17.9% (18.0)</p></td><td  ><p>12.3% (7.9)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+3050" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3050</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$249.99</p></td><td  ><p>15.6% (19.6)</p></td><td  ><p>12.5% (12.6)</p></td><td  ><p>7.1% (4.5)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Intel+Arc+B570" target="_blank"><strong>Intel Arc B570</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$219.99</p></td><td  ><p>15.7% (19.8)</p></td><td  ><p>12.9% (13.1)</p></td><td  ><p>5.1% (3.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+6600+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$379.99</p></td><td  ><p>13.7% (17.2)</p></td><td  ><p>9.0% (9.1)</p></td><td  ><p>5.4% (3.4)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+7600" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7600</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$269.99</p></td><td  ><p>12.7% (16.0)</p></td><td  ><p>9.3% (9.3)</p></td><td  ><p>6.5% (4.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+6650+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6650 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$399.99</p></td><td  ><p>12.4% (15.5)</p></td><td  ><p>9.1% (9.2)</p></td><td  ><p>5.3% (3.4)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+6600" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6600</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$329.99</p></td><td  ><p>10.2% (12.8)</p></td><td  ><p>7.6% (7.7)</p></td><td  ><p>4.8% (3.1)</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>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. </p><p>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. </p><p>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. <br><br>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.</p><p>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).</p><p>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.  </p><p>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. </p><p>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. </p><p>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. </p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-test-setup-and-hardware-for-gpu-benchmarks"><span>Test Setup and Hardware for GPU Benchmarks</span></h3><p>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. </p><p>Here are the specifications for our latest GPU test PC.</p><p><strong>Tom's Hardware 2026 GPU Benchmarks Testbed</strong></p><p><strong>CPU: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-7-9800x3d-review-devastating-gaming-performance">AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D</a><br><strong>CPU Cooler:</strong> <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Thermalright-Phantom-TL-C12B-Technilogy-Bearing/dp/B0BNDTJVPL">Thermalright Phantom Spirit 120 SE</a> <br><strong>Memory: </strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/G-Skill-Trident-288-Pin-CL30-38-38-96-F5-6000J3038F16GX2-TZ5NR/dp/B0BF8FVLSL">G.Skill Trident Z5 32GB (2x16GB) DDR5-6000 CL30</a><br><strong>Motherboard: </strong>Asus TUF Gaming X670E-Plus Wifi <br><strong>SSD: </strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/INLAND-Performance-Internal-7200MB-6800MB/dp/B09VSQ3V4P">Inland Performance Plus 4TB</a>  <br><strong>PSU: </strong><a href="https://www.newegg.com/msi-atx-3-1-1600-w-80-plus-titanium-certified-power-supplies-mpg-ai1600ts-pcie5/p/N82E16817701042">MSI MPG Ai1600TS 1600W</a><br><br>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.<br><br>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.<br><br>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.<br><br>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 <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/what-makes-a-good-game-benchmark" target="_blank">what makes a good game benchmark</a> for our selection criteria.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-gpu-benchmarks-individual-game-charts"><span>GPU Benchmarks: Individual Game Charts</span></h3><p>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. <br><br><strong>These charts are up to date as of June 2026.</strong></p><h2 id="gpu-benchmarks-1080p">GPU Benchmarks — 1080p</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kf4hsg7rgpGBcYdQZEU77A.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7rS3kA4uLQuFZ5syEu36EA.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/38wZLaFCFhUW4szsF2PjEA.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ssQtp9FMxccJqT5B87skRA.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PwdiycmRUgtwjqNaXQdsaA.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SFNPuwr5NQcSeVaiGKLcvA.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/f8XjFNw4gVM8niumMMX57B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/h6GkvrXj4qhs6DemWV4y6B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aMjU4onfmBRAMStXpgex6B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BayuMTHUyrxJmi7Gpwez6B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rLh9x8fFocfuCphNByVM7B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HjovyzsRgYWNcBSYUQwi7B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DaKXxT6TxbwezfeHb9fY7B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4hHuhf8axfzvqmY5hkzc7B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8CL9DseHu7kbzpYzw8uh7B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v3bqb3QFvRpYoH25SSQh7B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vLxyMsV5uPewDyLn6Nxn7B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6TfTxQiXtrvksuKZAGah7B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jCx8Bb8eiKtFDMh4mK2z7B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Xk4PyecAJGdeiCGB9tjj7B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jciivqZjUvoE9pB7WrXE8B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hhHZv6BsPtJixCRjVoEp8B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="gpu-benchmarks-1440p">GPU Benchmarks — 1440p</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dKYnTmFRRtqDMQAEaHW9bd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Pu5CbaEps7WeY9bnZ2pmbd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/55vEhT9SddytD7PX372bcd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DQmUQ6KDVN2TC5QFt3VNgd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6ptHDxXQF6FwLmSp4qztkd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aMNmxnus8oUBUtjqYEKgmd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rxxeDAsozxVDswSB5gSdtd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GozvJzHzMJ2Zocqqjeautd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BgFbpdJDJFo4ufXgVUwdwd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PxFQe8R8hChAm4DhxBtZzd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/K8Ud4kLrJS59SKRa2Gkizd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oqUtZXdprMEwgpVs9fXfAe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/At99PDJvYsiRRErcFRwZFe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/A67db96eoxJw3eGxVuZqYe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UjwZ6pFChPbUNBjARddpYe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/U6DcL6TBMKmT5yMtkMNAZe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oLVR4o9G78usY4sdcagAZe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Gy7CAhfDjkpbzNT9gLvCZe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7CgZanEascfEUCBwKXWHZe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qPXPqEFwdKxBtkD3fA3XZe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YyzBPnyGxQsPUVD7cpmxZe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zuHrWcFAm9wY7dpSRsECae.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="gpu-benchmarks-4k">GPU Benchmarks — 4K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MpFANmrVpKpKkcnrwbhWPb.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ug9KnefTRchDhAutJJovPb.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jrCuaLaMiC6aMXRdT7bkSb.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Hod22UEw99W6YAB968HzVb.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cbyofZ8PZBwjrYBQcuuCab.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3pCsoEWPddyrEuNzTnsrdb.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/giVZSJu3DiUiuJRecFpGxb.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5wSVdi8M7wxQJT5AVidUac.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TosMiVWhHvBdpXM9qMFXdc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3LDF7ZudiU9fE5Ux8NFCfc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/soK8MZo255dEAFTBrzuPfc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8yoeCcRqyEoBnzTi4b44jc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oxvJvUVdaLmET99nCdzKjc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/86WPHEbQxsvczctpmB2Gjc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/G5dWrYLhjNBhmPLwWmnBjc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WMyW3RMjfJTTjkfLaCwejc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rMvie2CMF7QkPt948Vfhjc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PDLgfZKjRU9cHoHTkzdpkc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/A4qMgXbjqSNfNC6WLrZUmc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7bjpJiiQzjcnJEb83MEGnc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DJZdPc8rwAnZak5RupsZnc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pRszfnNJPv6b9HBPACyknc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-gpu-benchmarks-power-clocks-and-temperatures"><span>GPU Benchmarks — Power, Clocks, and Temperatures</span></h3><p>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.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zii9jce6mYQoZNas59gfWV.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Average Power" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vb98MaJpjZ6Js7M8RXunWV.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Average Power" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tziwQ2uudwG85uMXpdbiWV.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Average Power" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure></figure><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7GgMCmcRQ6NXpv4N9pAEAe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Average Clock Speed" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QxcxQV8gLNwLnZVqZLRgAe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Average Clock Speed" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jvMGXrCjEqYMx3BTca4qAe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Average Clock Speed" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure></figure><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JQNewBndceRdqhiHB6ee.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Average Temperatures" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oobbNvLbW2TY2GQrxXsp.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Average Temperatures" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yB3UhPJkB55rztQzJRZK3.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Average Temperatures" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>If you're looking for the legacy GPU hierarchy, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388-2.html">head over to page two</a>! 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, <a href="https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/gpu-benchmarks-hierarchy-and-best-graphics-cards.3791856/" target="_blank">head over to our forums</a> and join the discussion!</p><h2 id="choosing-a-graphics-card">Choosing a Graphics Card</h2><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-choosing-a-graphics-card"><span>Choosing a Graphics Card</span></h3><h2 id="choosing-a-graphics-card-2">Choosing a Graphics Card</h2><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-buying-guide,5844.html">Which graphics card do you need</a>? 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.<br><br>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.<br><br>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 <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs for gaming</a> page, as well as our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">CPU Benchmarks</a> Hierarchy to make sure you have the right CPU for the level of gaming performance you're looking to achieve.</p><p>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 <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gaming-monitors,4533.html" target="_blank">the best gaming monitors</a> for a starting point. </p><h2 id="gpu-benchmarks-from-2022-2024">GPU Benchmarks from 2022–2024</h2><p>Our 'legacy' GPU benchmarks used different hardware. Here are the details for the 2022–2024 configuration that used an Alder Lake 12900K CPU.</p><p><strong>Tom's Hardware 2022–2024 GPU Testbed</strong></p><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09FXDLX95/">Intel Core i9-12900K</a><br><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09GLC1SS4/">MSI Pro Z690-A WiFi DDR4</a><br><a href="https://www.corsair.com/us/en/Categories/Products/Memory/DOMINATOR-PLATINUM-RGB/p/CMT64GX4M4K3600C16">Corsair 2x16GB DDR4-3600 CL16</a><br><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B098WKQRDL/">Crucial P5 Plus 2TB</a><br><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16817171207">Cooler Master MWE 1250 V2 Gold</a><br><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09PWVN9TP/">Cooler Master PL360 Flux</a><br><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/cooler-master-haf-500-masterbox-500-td300-cases">Cooler Master HAF500</a><br><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-11-everything-you-need-to-know">Windows 11 Pro 64-bit</a></p><p>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.<br><br>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 <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/intel-raptor-lake-instability-troubles-everything-you-need-to-know">impacted units that failed over time</a>, 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.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qiWnVboCCfkk2JgVern39L.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/odX4dmxSVcAKwfs6pcqvJL.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3BUQTn5dZgQi7zL8Xs4WUL.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BAGV2GBMHHE4gkb7ZzTxwK.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>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. <em>Where it made sense</em>, 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.<br><br>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.<br><br>The eight games used for our standard GPU benchmarks hierarchy are <em>Borderlands 3</em> (DX12), <em>Far Cry 6 </em>(DX12), <em>Flight Simulator</em> (DX11 Nvidia, DX12 AMD/Intel), <em>Forza Horizon 5</em> (DX12), <em>Horizon Zero Dawn</em> (DX12), <em>Red Dead Redemption 2</em> (Vulkan), <em>Total War Warhammer 3</em> (DX11), and <em>Watch Dogs Legion</em> (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.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p>Graphics Card</p></th><th  ><p>1080p Ultra</p></th><th  ><p>1080p Medium</p></th><th  ><p>1440p Ultra</p></th><th  ><p>4K Ultra</p></th><th  ><p>Specifications (Links to Review)</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4090"><strong>GeForce RTX 4090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (154.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (195.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (146.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (114.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-review">AD102, 16384 shaders, 2520MHz, 24GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 1008GB/s, 450W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7900+XTX"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 XTX</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>96.7% (149.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>97.2% (190.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>92.6% (135.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>83.1% (95.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top">Navi 31, 6144 shaders, 2500MHz, 24GB GDDR6@20Gbps, 960GB/s, 355W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4080+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 4080 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>96.2% (148.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>98.5% (192.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>91.0% (133.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>80.3% (91.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-super-review">AD103, 10240 shaders, 2550MHz, 16GB GDDR6X@23Gbps, 736GB/s, 320W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4080"><strong>GeForce RTX 4080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>95.4% (147.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>98.1% (192.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>89.3% (130.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>78.0% (89.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-review">AD103, 9728 shaders, 2505MHz, 16GB GDDR6X@22.4Gbps, 717GB/s, 320W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7900+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>93.4% (143.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>95.8% (187.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>86.1% (125.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>71.0% (81.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top">Navi 31, 5376 shaders, 2400MHz, 20GB GDDR6@20Gbps, 800GB/s, 315W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Ti+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>92.3% (142.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>96.8% (189.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>83.5% (122.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>68.7% (78.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-super-review">AD103, 8448 shaders, 2610MHz, 16GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 672GB/s, 285W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>89.8% (138.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>95.7% (187.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>79.8% (116.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>63.8% (73.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-review-a-costly-70-class-gpu">AD104, 7680 shaders, 2610MHz, 12GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 504GB/s, 285W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7900+GRE"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 GRE</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>88.1% (135.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>94.1% (184.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>78.0% (113.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>60.5% (69.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-radeon-rx-7900-gre-review">Navi 31, 5120 shaders, 2245MHz, 16GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 576GB/s, 260W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>87.1% (134.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>94.6% (185.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>75.2% (109.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>57.8% (66.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-super-review-boosted-clocks-and-core-counts-for-the-same-dollar599-as-the-vanilla-4070">AD104, 7168 shaders, 2475MHz, 12GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 504GB/s, 220W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6950+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6950 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>84.7% (130.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>91.7% (179.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>75.3% (110.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>58.6% (67.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6950-xt-review">Navi 21, 5120 shaders, 2310MHz, 16GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 576GB/s, 335W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3090+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3090 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>84.7% (130.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>90.5% (177.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>77.1% (112.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>66.3% (75.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/asus-geforce-rtx-3090-ti-review">GA102, 10752 shaders, 1860MHz, 24GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 1008GB/s, 450W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7800+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7800 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>83.9% (129.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>91.5% (179.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>72.4% (105.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>54.4% (62.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7800-xt-review">Navi 32, 3840 shaders, 2430MHz, 16GB GDDR6@19.5Gbps, 624GB/s, 263W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3090"><strong>GeForce RTX 3090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>81.4% (125.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>88.9% (174.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>72.5% (106.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>61.8% (70.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3090-review">GA102, 10496 shaders, 1695MHz, 24GB GDDR6X@19.5Gbps, 936GB/s, 350W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6900+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>80.9% (124.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>89.6% (175.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>69.9% (102.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>53.5% (61.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt-review">Navi 21, 5120 shaders, 2250MHz, 16GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 300W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3080+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>80.4% (123.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>87.8% (171.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>71.1% (103.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>60.1% (68.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-ti-review">GA102, 10240 shaders, 1665MHz, 12GB GDDR6X@19Gbps, 912GB/s, 350W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6800+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6800 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>79.6% (122.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>88.5% (173.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>67.8% (99.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>50.6% (57.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/the-amd-radeon-rx-6800-xt-and-rx-6800-review">Navi 21, 4608 shaders, 2250MHz, 16GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 300W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3080+12GB"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080 12GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>79.2% (122.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>86.5% (169.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>70.0% (102.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>58.3% (66.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/msi-geforce-rtx-3080-12gb-suprim-x">GA102, 8960 shaders, 1845MHz, 12GB GDDR6X@19Gbps, 912GB/s, 400W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4070"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>79.2% (122.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>90.7% (177.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>66.9% (97.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>50.0% (57.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-review">AD104, 5888 shaders, 2475MHz, 12GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 504GB/s, 200W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3080"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>76.0% (117.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>85.6% (167.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>66.0% (96.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>54.1% (62.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-review">GA102, 8704 shaders, 1710MHz, 10GB GDDR6X@19Gbps, 760GB/s, 320W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7700+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>75.3% (116.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>87.7% (171.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>63.4% (92.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>45.0% (51.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7700-xt-review">Navi 32, 3456 shaders, 2544MHz, 12GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 432GB/s, 245W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6800"><strong>Radeon RX 6800</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>74.4% (114.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>86.2% (168.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>61.0% (89.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>44.3% (50.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/the-amd-radeon-rx-6800-xt-and-rx-6800-review">Navi 21, 3840 shaders, 2105MHz, 16GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 250W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3070+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>67.5% (104.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>81.6% (159.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>56.7% (82.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>41.7% (47.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3070-ti-review">GA104, 6144 shaders, 1770MHz, 8GB GDDR6X@19Gbps, 608GB/s, 290W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6750+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6750 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>66.8% (102.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>82.6% (161.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>52.9% (77.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>37.4% (42.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6750-xt-review">Navi 22, 2560 shaders, 2600MHz, 12GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 432GB/s, 250W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4060+Ti+16GB"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>65.3% (100.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>82.6% (161.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>51.8% (75.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>36.4% (41.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-ti-16gb-review">AD106, 4352 shaders, 2535MHz, 16GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 288GB/s, 160W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4060+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>65.1% (100.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>81.8% (160.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>51.7% (75.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>34.6% (39.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-ti-review">AD106, 4352 shaders, 2535MHz, 8GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 288GB/s, 160W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Titan+RTX"><strong>Titan RTX</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>64.5% (99.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>80.0% (156.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>54.4% (79.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>41.8% (47.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-titan-rtx-deep-learning-gaming-tensor,5971.html">TU102, 4608 shaders, 1770MHz, 24GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 672GB/s, 280W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6700+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>64.3% (99.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>80.8% (158.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>50.3% (73.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>35.3% (40.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6700-xt-review">Navi 22, 2560 shaders, 2581MHz, 12GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 384GB/s, 230W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3070"><strong>GeForce RTX 3070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>64.1% (98.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>79.1% (154.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>53.2% (77.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>38.8% (44.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3070-founders-edition-review">GA104, 5888 shaders, 1725MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 220W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2080+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 2080 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>62.5% (96.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>77.2% (151.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>51.8% (75.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>38.0% (43.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-ti-founders-edition,5805.html">TU102, 4352 shaders, 1545MHz, 11GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 616GB/s, 250W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7600+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>59.7% (91.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>77.3% (151.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>45.1% (65.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>32.4% (37.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-radeon-rx-7600-xt-review">Navi 33, 2048 shaders, 2755MHz, 16GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 288GB/s, 190W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3060+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3060 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>58.9% (90.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>75.0% (146.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>47.9% (70.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3060-ti-founders-edition-review">GA104, 4864 shaders, 1665MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 200W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6700+10GB"><strong>Radeon RX 6700 10GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>55.9% (86.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>74.4% (145.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>43.0% (62.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>28.7% (32.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/sapphire-rx-6700-10gb-299-dollars">Navi 22, 2304 shaders, 2450MHz, 10GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 320GB/s, 175W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2080+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 2080 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>55.8% (86.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>72.2% (141.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>45.2% (66.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>32.1% (36.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-super-turing-ray-tracing,6243.html">TU104, 3072 shaders, 1815MHz, 8GB GDDR6@15.5Gbps, 496GB/s, 250W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4060"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>55.1% (84.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>72.7% (142.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>41.9% (61.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>27.8% (31.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-review-asus-dual">AD107, 3072 shaders, 2460MHz, 8GB GDDR6@17Gbps, 272GB/s, 115W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2080"><strong>GeForce RTX 2080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>53.5% (82.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>69.8% (136.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>43.2% (63.2fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-founders-edition,5809.html">TU104, 2944 shaders, 1710MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 215W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7600"><strong>Radeon RX 7600</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>53.2% (82.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>72.3% (141.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>39.2% (57.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>25.4% (29.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7600-review">Navi 33, 2048 shaders, 2655MHz, 8GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 288GB/s, 165W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6650+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6650 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>50.4% (77.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>70.0% (137.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>37.3% (54.5fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6650-xt-review">Navi 23, 2048 shaders, 2635MHz, 8GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 280GB/s, 180W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2070+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 2070 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>50.3% (77.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>66.2% (129.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>40.0% (58.4fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2060-super-geforce-rtx-2070-super,6207.html">TU104, 2560 shaders, 1770MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 215W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Intel+Arc+A770+16GB"><strong>Intel Arc A770 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>49.9% (76.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>59.4% (116.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>41.0% (59.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>30.8% (35.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a770-limited-edition-review">ACM-G10, 4096 shaders, 2400MHz, 16GB GDDR6@17.5Gbps, 560GB/s, 225W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Intel+Arc+A770+8GB"><strong>Intel Arc A770 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>48.9% (75.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>59.0% (115.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>39.3% (57.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>29.0% (33.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>ACM-G10, 4096 shaders, 2400MHz, 8GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 225W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6600+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>48.5% (74.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>68.2% (133.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>35.7% (52.2fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6600-xt-review">Navi 23, 2048 shaders, 2589MHz, 8GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 256GB/s, 160W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+5700+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 5700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>47.6% (73.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>63.8% (124.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>36.3% (53.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>25.6% (29.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx_5700-rx_5700_xt,6216.html">Navi 10, 2560 shaders, 1905MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 225W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3060"><strong>GeForce RTX 3060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>46.9% (72.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>61.8% (121.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>36.9% (54.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3060-review">GA106, 3584 shaders, 1777MHz, 12GB GDDR6@15Gbps, 360GB/s, 170W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Intel+Arc+A750"><strong>Intel Arc A750</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>45.9% (70.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>56.4% (110.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>36.7% (53.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>27.2% (31.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a750-limited-edition-review">ACM-G10, 3584 shaders, 2350MHz, 8GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 225W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2070"><strong>GeForce RTX 2070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>45.3% (69.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>60.8% (119.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>35.5% (51.8fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2070-founders-edition,5851.html">TU106, 2304 shaders, 1620MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 175W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+VII"><strong>Radeon VII</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>45.1% (69.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>58.2% (113.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>36.3% (53.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>27.5% (31.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-vii-vega-20-7nm,5977.html">Vega 20, 3840 shaders, 1750MHz, 16GB HBM2@2.0Gbps, 1024GB/s, 300W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1080+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 1080 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>43.1% (66.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>56.3% (110.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>34.4% (50.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>25.8% (29.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-ti,4972.html">GP102, 3584 shaders, 1582MHz, 11GB GDDR5X@11Gbps, 484GB/s, 250W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2060+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 2060 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>42.5% (65.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>57.2% (112.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>33.1% (48.3fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2060-super-geforce-rtx-2070-super,6207.html">TU106, 2176 shaders, 1650MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 175W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6600"><strong>Radeon RX 6600</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>42.3% (65.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>59.3% (116.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>30.6% (44.8fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6600-review-xfx">Navi 23, 1792 shaders, 2491MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 224GB/s, 132W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Intel+Arc+A580"><strong>Intel Arc A580</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>42.3% (65.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>51.6% (101.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>33.4% (48.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>24.4% (27.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a580-review-a-new-budget-contender">ACM-G10, 3072 shaders, 2300MHz, 8GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 185W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+5700"><strong>Radeon RX 5700</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>41.9% (64.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>56.6% (110.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>31.9% (46.7fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx_5700-rx_5700_xt,6216.html">Navi 10, 2304 shaders, 1725MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 180W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+5600+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 5600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>37.5% (57.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>51.1% (100.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>28.8% (42.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx_5600_xt">Navi 10, 2304 shaders, 1750MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 336GB/s, 160W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+Vega+64"><strong>Radeon RX Vega 64</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>36.8% (56.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>48.2% (94.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>28.5% (41.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>20.5% (23.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-vega-64,5173.html">Vega 10, 4096 shaders, 1546MHz, 8GB HBM2@1.89Gbps, 484GB/s, 295W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2060"><strong>GeForce RTX 2060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>36.0% (55.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>51.4% (100.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>27.5% (40.1fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2060-ray-tracing-turing,5960.html">TU106, 1920 shaders, 1680MHz, 6GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 336GB/s, 160W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1080"><strong>GeForce GTX 1080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>34.4% (53.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>45.9% (89.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>27.0% (39.4fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-graphics-cards,4725.html">GP104, 2560 shaders, 1733MHz, 8GB GDDR5X@10Gbps, 320GB/s, 180W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3050"><strong>GeForce RTX 3050</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>33.7% (51.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>45.4% (88.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>26.4% (38.5fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3050-review-evga-xc-black">GA106, 2560 shaders, 1777MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 224GB/s, 130W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1070+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 1070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>33.1% (51.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>43.8% (85.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>26.0% (37.9fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-ti-8gb,5311.html">GP104, 2432 shaders, 1683MHz, 8GB GDDR5@8Gbps, 256GB/s, 180W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+Vega+56"><strong>Radeon RX Vega 56</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>32.8% (50.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>43.0% (84.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>25.3% (37.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-rx-vega-56,5202.html">Vega 10, 3584 shaders, 1471MHz, 8GB HBM2@1.6Gbps, 410GB/s, 210W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1660+Super"><strong>GeForce GTX 1660 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>30.3% (46.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>43.7% (85.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>22.8% (33.3fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/evga-nvidia-geforce-gtx_1660_super-sc-ultra">TU116, 1408 shaders, 1785MHz, 6GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 336GB/s, 125W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1660+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 1660 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>30.3% (46.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>43.3% (84.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>22.8% (33.3fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1660-ti-turing,6002.html">TU116, 1536 shaders, 1770MHz, 6GB GDDR6@12Gbps, 288GB/s, 120W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1070"><strong>GeForce GTX 1070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>29.0% (44.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>38.3% (75.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>22.7% (33.1fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-8gb-pascal-performance,4585.html">GP104, 1920 shaders, 1683MHz, 8GB GDDR5@8Gbps, 256GB/s, 150W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1660"><strong>GeForce GTX 1660</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>27.7% (42.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>39.7% (77.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>20.8% (30.3fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1660-turing-tu116,6027.html">TU116, 1408 shaders, 1785MHz, 6GB GDDR5@8Gbps, 192GB/s, 120W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+5500+XT+8GB"><strong>Radeon RX 5500 XT 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>25.7% (39.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>36.8% (72.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>19.3% (28.2fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/asus-rog-strix-rx-5500-xt-o8g-gaming">Navi 14, 1408 shaders, 1845MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 224GB/s, 130W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+590"><strong>Radeon RX 590</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>25.5% (39.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>35.0% (68.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>19.9% (29.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-590,5907.html">Polaris 30, 2304 shaders, 1545MHz, 8GB GDDR5@8Gbps, 256GB/s, 225W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+980+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 980 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>23.3% (35.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>32.0% (62.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>18.2% (26.6fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti,4164.html">GM200, 2816 shaders, 1075MHz, 6GB GDDR5@7Gbps, 336GB/s, 250W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+580+8GB"><strong>Radeon RX 580 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>22.9% (35.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>31.5% (61.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>17.8% (26.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-580-review,5020.html">Polaris 20, 2304 shaders, 1340MHz, 8GB GDDR5@8Gbps, 256GB/s, 185W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+R9+Fury+X"><strong>Radeon R9 Fury X</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>22.9% (35.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>32.6% (63.8fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x,4196.html">Fiji, 4096 shaders, 1050MHz, 4GB HBM2@2Gbps, 512GB/s, 275W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1650+Super"><strong>GeForce GTX 1650 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>22.0% (33.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>34.6% (67.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>14.5% (21.2fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-gtx_1650-super-turing">TU116, 1280 shaders, 1725MHz, 4GB GDDR6@12Gbps, 192GB/s, 100W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+5500+XT+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 5500 XT 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>21.6% (33.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>34.1% (66.8fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-5500-xt-4gb">Navi 14, 1408 shaders, 1845MHz, 4GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 224GB/s, 130W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1060+6GB"><strong>GeForce GTX 1060 6GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>20.8% (32.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>29.5% (57.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>15.8% (23.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-pascal,4679.html">GP106, 1280 shaders, 1708MHz, 6GB GDDR5@8Gbps, 192GB/s, 120W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6500+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6500 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>19.9% (30.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>33.6% (65.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>12.3% (18.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6500-xt-review-xfx">Navi 24, 1024 shaders, 2815MHz, 4GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 144GB/s, 107W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+R9+390"><strong>Radeon R9 390</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>19.3% (29.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>26.1% (51.1fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sapphire-nitro-r9-390-8g-d5,4245.html">Grenada, 2560 shaders, 1000MHz, 8GB GDDR5@6Gbps, 384GB/s, 275W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+980"><strong>GeForce GTX 980</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>18.7% (28.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>27.4% (53.6fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-970-maxwell,3941.html">GM204, 2048 shaders, 1216MHz, 4GB GDDR5@7Gbps, 256GB/s, 165W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1650+GDDR6"><strong>GeForce GTX 1650 GDDR6</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>18.7% (28.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>28.9% (56.6fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/evga-geforce-gtx-1650-gddr6">TU117, 896 shaders, 1590MHz, 4GB GDDR6@12Gbps, 192GB/s, 75W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Intel+Arc+A380"><strong>Intel Arc A380</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>18.4% (28.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>27.7% (54.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>13.3% (19.5fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a380-review">ACM-G11, 1024 shaders, 2450MHz, 6GB GDDR6@15.5Gbps, 186GB/s, 75W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+570+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 570 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>18.2% (28.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>27.4% (53.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>13.6% (19.9fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-570-4gb,5028.html">Polaris 20, 2048 shaders, 1244MHz, 4GB GDDR5@7Gbps, 224GB/s, 150W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1650"><strong>GeForce GTX 1650</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>17.5% (27.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>26.2% (51.3fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-1650-turing-gpu,6096.html">TU117, 896 shaders, 1665MHz, 4GB GDDR5@8Gbps, 128GB/s, 75W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+970"><strong>GeForce GTX 970</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>17.2% (26.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>25.0% (49.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-970-maxwell,3941.html">GM204, 1664 shaders, 1178MHz, 4GB GDDR5@7Gbps, 256GB/s, 145W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6400"><strong>Radeon RX 6400</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>15.7% (24.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>26.1% (51.1fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6400-review-budget-in-almost-every-way">Navi 24, 768 shaders, 2321MHz, 4GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 128GB/s, 53W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1050+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 1050 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>12.9% (19.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>19.4% (38.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1050-ti,4787.html">GP107, 768 shaders, 1392MHz, 4GB GDDR5@7Gbps, 112GB/s, 75W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1060+3GB"><strong>GeForce GTX 1060 3GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p>26.8% (52.5fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-graphics-card-roundup,4724.html">GP106, 1152 shaders, 1708MHz, 3GB GDDR5@8Gbps, 192GB/s, 120W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1630"><strong>GeForce GTX 1630</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>10.9% (16.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>17.3% (33.8fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1630-review">TU117, 512 shaders, 1785MHz, 4GB GDDR6@12Gbps, 96GB/s, 75W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+560+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 560 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>9.6% (14.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>16.2% (31.7fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-560-4gb,5254.html">Baffin, 1024 shaders, 1275MHz, 4GB GDDR5@7Gbps, 112GB/s, 60-80W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1050"><strong>GeForce GTX 1050</strong></a></p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p>15.2% (29.7fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1050-ti,4787.html">GP107, 640 shaders, 1455MHz, 2GB GDDR5@7Gbps, 112GB/s, 75W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+550+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 550 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p>10.0% (19.5fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-550-2gb,5034.html">Lexa, 640 shaders, 1183MHz, 4GB GDDR5@7Gbps, 112GB/s, 50W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GT+1030"><strong>GeForce GT 1030</strong></a></p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p>7.5% (14.6fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gt-1030-2gb,5110.html">GP108, 384 shaders, 1468MHz, 2GB GDDR5@6Gbps, 48GB/s, 30W</a></p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p><em>*: GPU couldn't run all tests, so the overall score is slightly skewed at 1080p ultra.</em><br><br>While the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-review">RTX 4090</a> 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.<br><br>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 <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-review/7">DLSS 2/3 and FSR 2 upscaling results</a> in our RTX 4070 review if you want to check out how the various upscaling modes can help.<br><br>The RTX 4090 comes at a steep price, though on paper it's not that much worse than the previous generation <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3090-review">RTX 3090</a>. 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.<br><br>Stepping down from the RTX 4090, the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-super-review">RTX 4080 Super</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top">RX 7900 XTX</a> 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.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1600px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="AUVssB9ohAbRCiVZeS4vb9" name="intel-arc-a750-le-hero.png" alt="Intel" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AUVssB9ohAbRCiVZeS4vb9.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1600" height="900" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Intel)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Outside of the latest releases from AMD and Nvidia, the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-big_navi-rdna2-all-we-know">RX 6000-</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/nvidia-ampere-architecture-deep-dive">RTX 30-series</a> 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.<br><br>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. (<em>Minecraft</em> 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.<br><br>Turning to the previous generation GPUs, the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-turing-gpu-architecture-explored,5801.html">RTX 20-series</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1660-ti-turing,6002.html">GTX 16-series</a> chips end up scattered throughout the results, along with the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-radeon-rx-5000-series-navi-7nm-gpus,39451.html">RX 5000-series</a>. 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.<br><br>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.<br><br>Now let's switch over to the ray tracing hierarchy.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3840px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="Dying-Light-2-Settings-IQ-(50)-High-Quality-Raytracing.jpg" alt="Dying Light 2 settings and image quality comparisons" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CoRafe9dLaWhiDiW67vWVa.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="3840" height="2160" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Techland)</span></figcaption></figure><h2 id="ray-tracing-gpu-benchmarks-2022-2024">Ray Tracing GPU Benchmarks 2022–2024</h2><p>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.<br><br>Because ray tracing is so much more demanding, we're sorting these results by the 1080p medium scores. That's also because the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6500-xt-review-xfx">RX 6500 XT</a>, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6400-review-budget-in-almost-every-way">RX 6400</a>, and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a380-review">Arc A380</a> basically can't handle ray tracing even at these settings, and testing at anything more than 1080p medium would be fruitless.<br><br>The five ray tracing games used are <em>Bright Memory Infinite</em>, <em>Control Ultimate Edition</em>, <em>Cyberpunk 2077</em>, <em>Metro Exodus Enhanced</em>, and <em>Minecraft</em> — 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.<br><br>If you want to see what the future may hold with ray tracing, check out our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/alan-wake-2-will-punish-your-gpu"><em>Alan Wake 2</em> benchmarks</a> 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 <em>extremely</em> limited. For most games, we still feel running pure rasterization rendering makes more sense.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ebVqFaNGy5XDHYHA8nEcpL.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ULrbyCTag3qxHD3cMgWxzL.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GQofC5RFonswVPJ7E5VqBM.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/x9q9MqQroCPqDLdL9CvPeL.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><div ><table><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p>Graphics Card</p></th><th  ><p>1080p Medium</p></th><th  ><p>1080p Ultra</p></th><th  ><p>1440p Ultra</p></th><th  ><p>4K Ultra</p></th><th  ><p>Specifications (Links to Review)</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4090"><strong>GeForce RTX 4090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (165.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (136.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (103.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (55.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-review">AD102, 16384 shaders, 2520MHz, 24GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 1008GB/s, 450W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4080+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 4080 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>86.8% (144.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>85.3% (116.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>75.6% (78.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>70.5% (39.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-super-review">AD103, 10240 shaders, 2550MHz, 16GB GDDR6X@23Gbps, 736GB/s, 320W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4080"><strong>GeForce RTX 4080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>85.4% (141.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>83.4% (113.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>73.1% (76.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>67.7% (37.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-review">AD103, 9728 shaders, 2505MHz, 16GB GDDR6X@22.4Gbps, 717GB/s, 320W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Ti+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>77.3% (128.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>73.5% (100.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>63.5% (66.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>58.4% (32.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-super-review">AD103, 8448 shaders, 2610MHz, 16GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 672GB/s, 285W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3090+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3090 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>71.9% (119.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>68.4% (93.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>59.6% (62.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>56.9% (31.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/asus-geforce-rtx-3090-ti-review">GA102, 10752 shaders, 1860MHz, 24GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 1008GB/s, 450W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>71.5% (118.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>67.1% (91.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>56.9% (59.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>52.3% (29.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-review-a-costly-70-class-gpu">AD104, 7680 shaders, 2610MHz, 12GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 504GB/s, 285W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>68.1% (113.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>62.7% (85.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>52.4% (54.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>47.8% (26.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-super-review-boosted-clocks-and-core-counts-for-the-same-dollar599-as-the-vanilla-4070">AD104, 7168 shaders, 2475MHz, 12GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 504GB/s, 220W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3090"><strong>GeForce RTX 3090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>67.7% (112.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>63.5% (86.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>55.1% (57.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>51.8% (28.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3090-review">GA102, 10496 shaders, 1695MHz, 24GB GDDR6X@19.5Gbps, 936GB/s, 350W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3080+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>66.5% (110.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>62.2% (84.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>53.2% (55.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>48.6% (27.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-ti-review">GA102, 10240 shaders, 1665MHz, 12GB GDDR6X@19Gbps, 912GB/s, 350W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7900+XTX"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 XTX</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>66.1% (109.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>61.7% (84.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>53.2% (55.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>48.6% (27.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top">Navi 31, 6144 shaders, 2500MHz, 24GB GDDR6@20Gbps, 960GB/s, 355W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3080+12GB"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080 12GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>64.9% (107.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>59.9% (81.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>50.8% (52.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>46.3% (25.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/msi-geforce-rtx-3080-12gb-suprim-x">GA102, 8960 shaders, 1845MHz, 12GB GDDR6X@19Gbps, 912GB/s, 400W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4070"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>61.2% (101.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>54.2% (73.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>45.1% (46.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>40.7% (22.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-review">AD104, 5888 shaders, 2475MHz, 12GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 504GB/s, 200W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7900+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>60.4% (100.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>55.3% (75.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>46.7% (48.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>41.6% (23.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top">Navi 31, 5376 shaders, 2400MHz, 20GB GDDR6@20Gbps, 800GB/s, 315W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3080"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>60.2% (99.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>54.5% (74.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>46.1% (47.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>41.8% (23.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-review">GA102, 8704 shaders, 1710MHz, 10GB GDDR6X@19Gbps, 760GB/s, 320W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7900+GRE"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 GRE</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>52.9% (87.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>46.8% (63.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>39.6% (41.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>35.7% (19.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-radeon-rx-7900-gre-review">Navi 31, 5120 shaders, 2245MHz, 16GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 576GB/s, 260W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3070+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>50.6% (84.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>43.0% (58.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>35.7% (37.1fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3070-ti-review">GA104, 6144 shaders, 1770MHz, 8GB GDDR6X@19Gbps, 608GB/s, 290W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6950+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6950 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>48.3% (80.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>41.4% (56.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>34.3% (35.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>31.0% (17.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6950-xt-review">Navi 21, 5120 shaders, 2310MHz, 16GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 576GB/s, 335W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3070"><strong>GeForce RTX 3070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>47.2% (78.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>39.9% (54.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>32.8% (34.1fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3070-founders-edition-review">GA104, 5888 shaders, 1725MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 220W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7800+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7800 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>46.7% (77.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>41.9% (57.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>34.9% (36.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>31.0% (17.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7800-xt-review">Navi 32, 3840 shaders, 2430MHz, 16GB GDDR6@19.5Gbps, 624GB/s, 263W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6900+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>45.4% (75.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>38.3% (52.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>32.1% (33.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>28.8% (16.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt-review">Navi 21, 5120 shaders, 2250MHz, 16GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 300W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4060+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>45.2% (75.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>38.7% (52.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>32.3% (33.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>24.8% (13.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-ti-review">AD106, 4352 shaders, 2535MHz, 8GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 288GB/s, 160W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4060+Ti+16GB"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>45.2% (75.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>38.8% (53.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>32.7% (34.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>29.5% (16.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-ti-16gb-review">AD106, 4352 shaders, 2535MHz, 16GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 288GB/s, 160W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Titan+RTX"><strong>Titan RTX</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>44.8% (74.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>39.1% (53.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>33.7% (35.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>31.2% (17.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-titan-rtx-deep-learning-gaming-tensor,5971.html">TU102, 4608 shaders, 1770MHz, 24GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 672GB/s, 280W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2080+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 2080 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>42.7% (70.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>37.2% (50.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>31.6% (32.9fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-ti-founders-edition,5805.html">TU102, 4352 shaders, 1545MHz, 11GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 616GB/s, 250W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6800+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6800 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>42.2% (70.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>35.6% (48.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>29.9% (31.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>26.8% (15.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/the-amd-radeon-rx-6800-xt-and-rx-6800-review">Navi 21, 4608 shaders, 2250MHz, 16GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 300W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3060+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3060 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>41.9% (69.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>35.0% (47.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>28.8% (30.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3060-ti-founders-edition-review">GA104, 4864 shaders, 1665MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 200W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7700+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>41.3% (68.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>36.5% (49.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>30.6% (31.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>27.2% (15.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7700-xt-review">Navi 32, 3456 shaders, 2544MHz, 12GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 432GB/s, 245W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6800"><strong>Radeon RX 6800</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>36.3% (60.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>30.2% (41.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>25.4% (26.3fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/the-amd-radeon-rx-6800-xt-and-rx-6800-review">Navi 21, 3840 shaders, 2105MHz, 16GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 250W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2080+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 2080 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>35.8% (59.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>30.8% (42.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>26.1% (27.1fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-super-turing-ray-tracing,6243.html">TU104, 3072 shaders, 1815MHz, 8GB GDDR6@15.5Gbps, 496GB/s, 250W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4060"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>35.4% (58.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>30.6% (41.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>24.9% (25.8fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-review-asus-dual">AD107, 3072 shaders, 2460MHz, 8GB GDDR6@17Gbps, 272GB/s, 115W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2080"><strong>GeForce RTX 2080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>34.4% (57.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>29.1% (39.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>24.6% (25.5fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-founders-edition,5809.html">TU104, 2944 shaders, 1710MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 215W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Intel+Arc+A770+8GB"><strong>Intel Arc A770 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>32.7% (54.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>28.4% (38.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>24.0% (24.9fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p>ACM-G10, 4096 shaders, 2400MHz, 8GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 225W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Intel+Arc+A770+16GB"><strong>Intel Arc A770 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>32.6% (54.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>28.3% (38.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>25.3% (26.2fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a770-limited-edition-review">ACM-G10, 4096 shaders, 2400MHz, 16GB GDDR6@17.5Gbps, 560GB/s, 225W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3060"><strong>GeForce RTX 3060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>31.7% (52.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>25.7% (35.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>21.1% (22.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3060-review">GA106, 3584 shaders, 1777MHz, 12GB GDDR6@15Gbps, 360GB/s, 170W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2070+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 2070 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>31.6% (52.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>26.8% (36.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>22.3% (23.1fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2060-super-geforce-rtx-2070-super,6207.html">TU104, 2560 shaders, 1770MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 215W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Intel+Arc+A750"><strong>Intel Arc A750</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>30.7% (51.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>26.8% (36.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>22.6% (23.5fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a750-limited-edition-review">ACM-G10, 3584 shaders, 2350MHz, 8GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 225W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6750+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6750 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>30.0% (49.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>25.3% (34.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>20.7% (21.5fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6750-xt-review">Navi 22, 2560 shaders, 2600MHz, 12GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 432GB/s, 250W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6700+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>28.1% (46.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>23.7% (32.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>19.1% (19.9fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6700-xt-review">Navi 22, 2560 shaders, 2581MHz, 12GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 384GB/s, 230W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2070"><strong>GeForce RTX 2070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>27.9% (46.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>23.5% (32.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>19.7% (20.4fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2070-founders-edition,5851.html">TU106, 2304 shaders, 1620MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 175W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Intel+Arc+A580"><strong>Intel Arc A580</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>27.5% (45.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>24.0% (32.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>20.3% (21.1fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a580-review-a-new-budget-contender">ACM-G10, 3072 shaders, 2300MHz, 8GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 185W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2060+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 2060 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>26.8% (44.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>22.4% (30.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>18.5% (19.3fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2060-super-geforce-rtx-2070-super,6207.html">TU106, 2176 shaders, 1650MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 175W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7600+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>26.6% (44.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>22.6% (30.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>18.3% (19.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>16.0% (8.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-radeon-rx-7600-xt-review">Navi 33, 2048 shaders, 2755MHz, 16GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 288GB/s, 190W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6700+10GB"><strong>Radeon RX 6700 10GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>25.9% (42.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>21.4% (29.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>16.8% (17.5fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/sapphire-rx-6700-10gb-299-dollars">Navi 22, 2304 shaders, 2450MHz, 10GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 320GB/s, 175W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2060"><strong>GeForce RTX 2060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>23.2% (38.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>18.6% (25.4fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2060-ray-tracing-turing,5960.html">TU106, 1920 shaders, 1680MHz, 6GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 336GB/s, 160W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7600"><strong>Radeon RX 7600</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>23.1% (38.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>18.9% (25.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>14.7% (15.2fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7600-review">Navi 33, 2048 shaders, 2655MHz, 8GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 288GB/s, 165W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6650+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6650 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>22.7% (37.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>18.8% (25.6fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6650-xt-review">Navi 23, 2048 shaders, 2635MHz, 8GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 280GB/s, 180W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3050"><strong>GeForce RTX 3050</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>22.3% (36.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>18.0% (24.6fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3050-review-evga-xc-black">GA106, 2560 shaders, 1777MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 224GB/s, 130W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6600+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>22.1% (36.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>18.2% (24.8fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6600-xt-review">Navi 23, 2048 shaders, 2589MHz, 8GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 256GB/s, 160W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6600"><strong>Radeon RX 6600</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>18.6% (30.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>15.2% (20.7fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6600-review-xfx">Navi 23, 1792 shaders, 2491MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 224GB/s, 132W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Intel+Arc+A380"><strong>Intel Arc A380</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>11.0% (18.3fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a380-review">ACM-G11, 1024 shaders, 2450MHz, 6GB GDDR6@15.5Gbps, 186GB/s, 75W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6500+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6500 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>5.9% (9.9fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6500-xt-review-xfx">Navi 24, 1024 shaders, 2815MHz, 4GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 144GB/s, 107W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6400"><strong>Radeon RX 6400</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>5.0% (8.3fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6400-review-budget-in-almost-every-way">Navi 24, 768 shaders, 2321MHz, 4GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 128GB/s, 53W</a></p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>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 <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/nvidia-ada-lovelace-and-geforce-rtx-40-series-everything-we-know">Ada Lovelace architecture</a>, 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.<br><br>If you want a real kick in the pants, we also ran many of the faster ray tracing GPUs through <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/cyberpunk-2077-rt-overdrive-path-tracing-full-path-tracing-fully-unnecessary"><em>Cyberpunk 2077</em>'s RT Overdrive</a> mode, which implements full "path tracing" (full ray tracing, without any rasterization) — as well as <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/alan-wake-2-will-punish-your-gpu"><em>Alan Wake 2</em></a>, which uses path tracing at higher settings, and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-bundles-black-myth-wukong-with-rtx-40-series-gpus"><em>Black Myth: Wukong</em></a> 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.<br><br>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.<br><br>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 <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-rdna-3-gpu-architecture-deep-dive-the-ryzen-moment-for-gpus">chiplets on the new RDNA 3 GPUs</a>. 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.<br><br>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), <em>Minecraft</em> performance also looks much more in line with the other Arc DXR results.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3840px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="Nvidia-RTX-4090-FE-(105).jpg" alt="Nvidia GeForce RTX 4090 Founders Edition" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dVcdGw9eAbveYkJas6nf5b.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="3840" height="2160" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>You can also see what DLSS Quality mode did for performance in DXR games on the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-review/3">RTX 4090 in our review</a>, 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.<br><br>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. <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-fsr2-deathloop-vs-dlss">AMD's FSR 2</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-fsr-3-now-in-a-dozen-games-including-starfield-too-bad-the-latter-has-hemorrhaged-players-since-launch">FSR 3</a> 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.<br><br>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.<br><br>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 <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/testing-gpus-with-amd-fsr3-and-avatar-frontiers-of-pandora-16-graphics-cards-and-hundreds-of-benchmarks"><em>Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora</em></a> and found it worked pretty well, but that was not the case in <em>Forspoken</em> and <em>Immortals of Aveum</em>. 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.<br><br>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. (<em>Control</em> requires at least 6GB VRAM to let you enable ray tracing.)<br><br>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 <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/arc-a770-beats-rtx-3060-in-ray-tracing-performance-in-new-intel-benchmarks">deep dive into its ray tracing hardware</a>, 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.<br><br>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.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="Alder-Lake-testbed-(1).jpg" alt="Tom's Hardware 2022–2024 GPU Testbed" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fCLgtUvbCPcxRkKbshMcfE.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="caption-text">Tom's Hardware 2022–2024 GPU Testbed </span><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><h2 id="test-system-and-how-we-test-for-gpu-benchmarks">Test System and How We Test for GPU Benchmarks</h2><p>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.<br><br>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.<br><br>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 <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/what-makes-a-good-game-benchmark">what makes a good game benchmark</a> for our selection criteria.</p><h2 id="gpu-benchmarks-individual-game-charts">GPU Benchmarks: Individual Game Charts</h2><p>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).<br><br><strong>These charts were up to date as of November 11, 2024.</strong></p><h2 id="gpu-benchmarks-1080p-medium">GPU Benchmarks — 1080p Medium</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XZG38QCwgwduXfLe2fnUzD.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CE8TdG2mSztthniqbs4YsE.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iAc7ATnjZ8Lc4gXMMf4FkF.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/s7AhzbToiWgQsoKtALuGEK.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bfnNw9RMAExw5YQccHVL7L.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZYjovHPoLAF5rz6UgaaWoT.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4erNU52qxikA4qhXeBtriS.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qFQvqdkVtGctuz89RFxyBV.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/P3TbrtCEjhicn67dLmYSsV.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pf2r9PDRFsr7ZiM5viYWXW.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SZzpyiLLYD3QypFaPYU4BX.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tRN3b6ch6JYMBEuNGoMGEY.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QmGiC3sqh6AR77thYQd78Z.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/29E6fC4Hnm6muuDBfV3HxZ.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/73yHcc6dACiFbKhaoYjw4b.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/m9soW2Bdx7vxpeTjTfsMec.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YzHtKdZXNv9wQFHto3LjZP.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cC4YNHJ9sqYVwrFbqu4AVd.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PWzTkZZWYkGyQqPFvorfmb.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WEGtin47emgmNmB2xLh2Me.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2zz2j6QhfVWyEVc2CuMRCf.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KAXM8oqYKMYNPPmew3BC5g.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="gpu-benchmarks-1080p-ultra">GPU Benchmarks — 1080p Ultra</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9RyegtqtH8tgKNCJSXNrEE.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XKc2BBi4Lv9S2zRwTaJy6F.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BQaLvA5zacQyGvrKVaCwxF.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/raSLsHJwZnuzztyeMZhAfK.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9JAoCeomMyNe4YJtRNcsKL.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9rXCpYEitaaUwXNwcWYw2U.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KudRNfjYNeQ8CVtYUj2V9T.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yPNFZHjrZPJFMsdRDsMsjU.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oeEYgtL6HD2izkSbAUuGfV.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pq7gyWRF9ueimAzUwSAtwW.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4DZQd9uGxxmEMbMyj3BDnX.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NrRSK3aXo6BqJXRYWbsjeY.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bdcezdoHoWP6XtDJwbqALZ.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/J8mdH52Uxz6jN9knz4jRBa.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JEoMYZuv6ney8HM6bM5HJb.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7kdvNnPAKBumRMg5WVNPrc.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Sbu37bhzjpB4dEhGGKFNnP.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fJwaWdzQF75tTCKM3dKXhd.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Q3GNysjJomePyfdUaxEPzb.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bNjHaJXQVwaNKCCsqxZZZe.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SKRA6YNwdpahR8yqXAnqQf.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cWvTju538KSdsntnx5ShGg.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="gpu-benchmarks-1440p-ultra">GPU Benchmarks — 1440p Ultra</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yEePBiSeor6ypbj86oLGTE.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eDN4KsamKWZRezewSfQHKF.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mCQdqJyjw6pFXMTMinHZCG.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bh24Ec4bBoX7bNLVYeeaSK.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/r7T3nNVWhgyQSXdhF7c7bL.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hpawEc27tm6prtsuQ2R7FU.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/REHrXECKuo7Rf5ZzSM9rMT.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KGHmYZyr2M7bR9gHgZpTxU.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GHiDgxzQFpEKq2LiuuLk6W.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ix8msjiNkQM6y8yu4o6vjW.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZfW8oK4ZCnQ5CpAbhxWvZX.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mFRXpdZGg4S2UsYVKtaeSY.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gr9CsZBAchqqY3zkH8uhXZ.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qbF44BZcYPBnaBcMuhimPa.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8KtboTw9i2gEbMypdpxUqa.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dcYx9eEmYGQYMbCaLcKi5d.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dQtuqoDtdWgkvDB9z6Q42Q.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/o5eUbwzH4v5UhToJJ7wjud.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tbi3kUSbjGFtF2uwYjpeDc.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gLYBX7mMPvQRB2inyURkme.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RE3qEWobanWhEK3eChuSdf.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Bifzo88UnP6rxE5CuKHkUg.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="gpu-benchmarks-4k-ultra">GPU Benchmarks — 4K Ultra</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZDwt7wik5ePX2kB2vkTJfE.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dQfQpYzTPeb3dQkuph5zXF.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/763WADaaYYCvNHvTk4wxPG.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aScyTuTh7xXWWH3uaotWtK.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EUTbxTxPrfujFcHoCsx2oL.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YnbLCfwSnLp7KnuTVi4PWU.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/99iL99qNMphJYvEMaDCQaT.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LbzcP7rvpXCLPVQrmzyJQV.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zmto4RgLTFScvKGqUTh5KW.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Q3gpo6D4ybzw45uhN5bQNX.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2fJ8iMAQdkpD4VrS7BEizX.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/J5eoCYqeiuVS3tRYwy4itY.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hfNJYT9MMniEzaj6Fbn2kZ.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YrjmYA5c9prvbv7jsojoca.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/46LbDwhSWW8u6NAvsnU6Zb.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TUhKyhNqwmdd8hw4woanGd.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2vtwZ3uemZ7V2BrEzz8FEQ.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Lkg3z6gGFNcGLW5Denfw8e.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FariNs8xGTbi4RgU7zdJSc.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/g49YjkhabRVAG2TFPRsVye.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NC2yMvdFjdqDUAvcnSYgqf.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GK6J3Q2b5PuTvGbf6NLigg.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="gpu-benchmarks-power-clocks-and-temperatures">GPU Benchmarks — Power, Clocks, and Temperatures</h2><p>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.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/U8dDdsdu2mm2qtUHz8JPcG.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FTXc8umXeNgZjNdGgTeVqG.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hkF3owHwFG4GciiDKkdD4H.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yXdMTPY7sib6n6DSEutzFH.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MbDno3HuKWoCnoiss7cbUH.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UQT7tES3H5hWNhRAvvPMhH.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/krVH7JGPvSAeVBWfsKUTuH.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DxAFhdJE65jaNNrE8MF2AJ.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/boqpih7hyKhunpZHNt6LNJ.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kFUpCC8Te2j82MgLnYddaJ.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4hoZqYCE2ZrnVrGz2xVCoJ.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qPBnDNMgzfDS9ZaunTd22K.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2560px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="RTX-3050-GPU-collection-(2).jpg" alt="A collection of new and old graphics cards" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/J7e5SkswoMun2EsKqkUMe8.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="2560" height="1440" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="caption-text">A collection of new and old graphics cards </span><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>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.</p><p><strong>Tom's Hardware 2020–2021 GPU Testbed</strong></p><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i9-9900K-Desktop-Processor-Unlocked/dp/B005404P9I">Intel Core i9-9900K</a><br><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077FZPCRH/">Corsair H150i Pro RGB</a><br><a href="https://www.amazon.com/MSI-MEG-Z390-ACE-Motherboard/dp/B07HM3M86B/">MSI MEG Z390 Ace</a><br><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07GTG2T7L/">Corsair 2x16GB DDR4-3200</a><br><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07TY2TN64/">XPG SX8200 Pro 2TB</a><br><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Windows-10-Pro-Download/dp/B01019BOEA">Windows 10 Pro</a> (21H1)</p><p>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.<br><br>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.</p><div ><table><caption>2020–2021 GPU Hierarchy (No Longer Updated)</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol empty" ></th><th  ><p>Score</p></th><th  ><p>GPU</p></th><th  ><p>Base/Boost</p></th><th  ><p>Memory</p></th><th  ><p>Power</p></th><th  ><p>Buy</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+3090">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3090</a></p></td><td  ><p>100.0%</p></td><td  ><p>GA102</p></td><td  ><p>1400/1695 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>24GB GDDR6X</p></td><td  ><p>350W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.bestbuy.com/site/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3090-24gb-gddr6x-pci-express-4-0-graphics-card-titanium-and-black/6429434.p?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3090</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+3080+Ti">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080 Ti</a></p></td><td  ><p>97.9%</p></td><td  ><p>GA102</p></td><td  ><p>1370/1665 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>12GB GDDR6X</p></td><td  ><p>350W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://shop-links.co/link?publisher_slug=future&exclusive=1&u1=tomshardware-us-1039622113527301200&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bestbuy.com%2Fsite%2Fnvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-ti-12gb-gddr6x-pci-express-4-0-graphics-card-titanium-and-black%2F6462956.p&article_name=Toms%20Hardware&article_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tomshardware.com">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080 Ti</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+6900+XT">AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT</a></p></td><td  ><p>97.0%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 21</p></td><td  ><p>1825/2250 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>16GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>300W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/asus-tuf-rx6900xt-o16g-gaming/p/N82E16814126487?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+6800+XT">AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT</a></p></td><td  ><p>93.5%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 21</p></td><td  ><p>1825/2250 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>16GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>300W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.bestbuy.com/site/xfx-amd-radeon-rx-6800xt-16gb-gddr6-pci-express-4-0-gaming-graphics-card-black/6441226.p?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+3080">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080</a></p></td><td  ><p>93.2%</p></td><td  ><p>GA102</p></td><td  ><p>1440/1710 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>10GB GDDR6X</p></td><td  ><p>320W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.bestbuy.com/site/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-10gb-gddr6x-pci-express-4-0-graphics-card-titanium-and-black/6429440.p?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+6800">AMD Radeon RX 6800</a></p></td><td  ><p>85.7%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 21</p></td><td  ><p>1700/2105 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>16GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>250W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://shop-links.co/link?publisher_slug=future&exclusive=1&u1=tomshardware-us-1380391777239238100&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bestbuy.com%2Fsite%2Fgigabyte-amd-radeon-rx-6800-gaming-oc-16gb-gddr6-pci-express-4-0-graphics-card%2F6453897.p&article_name=Toms%20Hardware&article_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tomshardware.com">AMD Radeon RX 6800</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+3070">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070 Ti</a></p></td><td  ><p>81.5%</p></td><td  ><p>GA104</p></td><td  ><p>1575/1770 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6X</p></td><td  ><p>290W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://shop-links.co/link?publisher_slug=future&exclusive=1&u1=tomshardware-us-2239069533949134300&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bestbuy.com%2Fsite%2Fnvidia-geforce-rtx-3070-ti-8gb-gddr6x-pci-express-4-0-graphics-card-dark-platinum-and-black%2F6465789.p&article_name=Toms%20Hardware&article_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tomshardware.com">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070 Ti</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Titan+RTX">Nvidia Titan RTX</a></p></td><td  ><p>79.5%</p></td><td  ><p>TU102</p></td><td  ><p>1350/1770 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>24GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/nvidia-Titan-Graphic-Cards-900-1G150-2500-000/dp/B07L8YGDL5?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Nvidia Titan RTX</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+2080+Ti">Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti</a></p></td><td  ><p>77.4%</p></td><td  ><p>TU102</p></td><td  ><p>1350/1635 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>11GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>260W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://click.linksynergy.com/deeplink?id=Cty0dj6o3sg&mid=38606&u1=TomsHardware&murl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bestbuy.com%2Fsite%2Fnvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-ti-founders-edition-11gb-gddr6-pci-express-3-0-graphics-card%2F6291646.p%3FskuId%3D6291646">Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+3070">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070</a></p></td><td  ><p>76.3%</p></td><td  ><p>GA104</p></td><td  ><p>1500/1730 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>220W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.bestbuy.com/site/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3070-8gb-gddr6-pci-express-4-0-graphics-card-dark-platinum-and-black/6429442.p?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+6700+XT">AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT</a></p></td><td  ><p>73.3%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 22</p></td><td  ><p>2321/2424 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>12GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>230W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://shop-links.co/link?publisher_slug=future&exclusive=1&u1=tomshardware-us-4557773548909726700&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bestbuy.com%2Fsite%2Fgigabyte-amd-radeon-rx-6700-xt-gaming-oc-12gb-gddr6-pci-express-4-0-gaming-graphics-card%2F6457993.p&article_name=Toms%20Hardware&article_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tomshardware.com">AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+3060+Ti">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060 Ti</a></p></td><td  ><p>69.6%</p></td><td  ><p>GA104</p></td><td  ><p>1410/1665 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>200W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/asus-geforce-rtx-3060-ti-tuf-rtx3060ti-o8g-gaming/p/N82E16814126471?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060 Ti</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Titan+V">Nvidia Titan V</a></p></td><td  ><p>68.7%</p></td><td  ><p>GV100</p></td><td  ><p>1200/1455 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>12GB HBM2</p></td><td  ><p>250W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/NVIDIA-Titan-900-1G500-2500-000-PCIe3-0x16-Graphics/dp/B07WMMDV82?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Nvidia Titan V</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+2080+Super">Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Super</a></p></td><td  ><p>66.8%</p></td><td  ><p>TU104</p></td><td  ><p>1650/1815 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>250W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/GIGABYTE-GeForce-Graphics-256-Bit-GV-N208STURBO-8GC/dp/B07V1DJ9KG?ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">GeForce RTX 2080 Super</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+2080">Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080</a></p></td><td  ><p>62.5%</p></td><td  ><p>TU104</p></td><td  ><p>1515/1800 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>225W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://click.linksynergy.com/deeplink?id=Cty0dj6o3sg&mid=38606&u1=TomsHardware&murl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bestbuy.com%2Fsite%2Fnvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-founders-edition-8gb-gddr6-pci-express-3-0-graphics-card%2F6291648.p%3FskuId%3D6291648">GeForce RTX 2080</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Titan+Xp">Nvidia Titan Xp</a></p></td><td  ><p>61.1%</p></td><td  ><p>GP102</p></td><td  ><p>1405/1480 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>12GB GDDR5X</p></td><td  ><p>250W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/EVGA-GeForce-GAMING-Graphics-12G-P4-2990-KR/dp/B00UVN21RQ?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware-deal&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">GeForce GTX Titan X</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+2070+Super">Nvidia GeForce RTX 2070 Super</a></p></td><td  ><p>59.6%</p></td><td  ><p>TU104</p></td><td  ><p>1605/1770 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>215W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/graphics-cards/rtx-2070-super/">GeForce RTX 2070 Super</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+VII">AMD Radeon VII</a></p></td><td  ><p>58.9%</p></td><td  ><p>Vega 20</p></td><td  ><p>1400/1750 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>16GB HBM2</p></td><td  ><p>300W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-8900246-12920453?sid=tomshardware-&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814202330">Radeon VII</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1080+Ti">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Ti</a></p></td><td  ><p>57.8%</p></td><td  ><p>GP102</p></td><td  ><p>1480/1582 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>11GB GDDR5X</p></td><td  ><p>250W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/msi-geforce-gtx-1080-ti-armor-11g-oc/p/N82E16814137111">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Ti</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+6600+XT">AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT</a></p></td><td  ><p>57.7%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 23</p></td><td  ><p>1968/2589 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>160W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+6600+XT">AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+5700+XT">AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT</a></p></td><td  ><p>57.0%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 10</p></td><td  ><p>1605/1905 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>225W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/XFX-Radeon-5700-GDDR6-3xDP/dp/B07TB5FBV6?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware-deal&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+3060+12GB">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060 12GB</a></p></td><td  ><p>54.7%</p></td><td  ><p>GA106</p></td><td  ><p>1320/1777 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>12GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>170W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/ASUS-Graphics-DisplayPort-Axial-tech-2-7-Slot/dp/B08WGTL4CW?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060 12GB</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+2070">Nvidia GeForce RTX 2070</a></p></td><td  ><p>53.1%</p></td><td  ><p>TU106</p></td><td  ><p>1410/1710 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>185W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.bestbuy.com/site/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2070-founders-edition-8gb-gddr6-pci-express-3-1-graphics-card/6291650.p?skuId=6291650">RTX 2070</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+5700">AMD Radeon RX 5700</a></p></td><td  ><p>51.4%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 10</p></td><td  ><p>1465/1725 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>185W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/XFX-Radeon-5700-GDDR6-3xDP/dp/B07T81CGFY?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware-deal&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">AMD Radeon RX 5700</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+2060+Super">Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060 Super</a></p></td><td  ><p>50.6%</p></td><td  ><p>TU106</p></td><td  ><p>1470/1650 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>175W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/graphics-cards/rtx-2060-super/">GeForce RTX 2060 Super</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+6600">AMD Radeon RX 6600</a></p></td><td  ><p>49.2%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 23</p></td><td  ><p>1626/2491 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>132W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+6600">AMD Radeon RX 6600</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+Vega+64">AMD Radeon RX Vega 64</a></p></td><td  ><p>48.4%</p></td><td  ><p>Vega 10</p></td><td  ><p>1274/1546 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB HBM2</p></td><td  ><p>295W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/gigabyte-radeon-rx-vega-64-gv-rxvega64gaming-oc-8gd/p/N82E16814932031">Gigabyte Radeon RX Vega 64</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+5600+XT">AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT</a></p></td><td  ><p>46.6%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 10</p></td><td  ><p>?/1615 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>6GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>150W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814137263">Radeon RX 5600 XT</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1080">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080</a></p></td><td  ><p>45.2%</p></td><td  ><p>GP104</p></td><td  ><p>1607/1733 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR5X</p></td><td  ><p>180W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3ehttps://www.amazon.com/EVGA-GeForce-Support-Graphics-08G-P4-6183-KR/dp/B07K8SDFQV0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814487318&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+2060">Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060</a></p></td><td  ><p>44.9%</p></td><td  ><p>TU106</p></td><td  ><p>1365/1680 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>6GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>160W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/msi-geforce-rtx-2060-rtx-2060-ventus-6g-oc/p/N82E16814137380">Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060 FE</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+Vega+56">AMD Radeon RX Vega 56</a></p></td><td  ><p>42.7%</p></td><td  ><p>Vega 10</p></td><td  ><p>1156/1471 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB HBM2</p></td><td  ><p>210W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814137263">Radeon RX Vega 56</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1070+Ti">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 Ti</a></p></td><td  ><p>41.8%</p></td><td  ><p>GP104</p></td><td  ><p>1607/1683 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>180W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814932012">GeForce GTX 1070 Ti</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+3050">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3050</a></p></td><td  ><p>40.5%</p></td><td  ><p>GA106</p></td><td  ><p>1552/1777 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>130W</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1660+Super">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Super</a></p></td><td  ><p>37.9%</p></td><td  ><p>TU116</p></td><td  ><p>1530/1785 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>6GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>125W</p></td><td  ><p>GeForce GTX 1660 Super</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1660+Ti">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Ti</a></p></td><td  ><p>37.8%</p></td><td  ><p>TU116</p></td><td  ><p>1365/1680 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>6GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>120W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-8900246-12920453?sid=tomshardware-&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814487430">GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1070">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070</a></p></td><td  ><p>36.7%</p></td><td  ><p>GP104</p></td><td  ><p>1506/1683 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>150W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814127951">MSI GTX 1070</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GTX+Titan+X+(Maxwell)">Nvidia GTX Titan X (Maxwell)</a></p></td><td  ><p>35.3%</p></td><td  ><p>GM200</p></td><td  ><p>1000/1075 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>12GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/EVGA-GeForce-GAMING-Graphics-12G-P4-2990-KR/dp/B00UVN21RQ?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Nvidia GTX Titan X</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+980+Ti">Nvidia GeForce GTX 980 Ti</a></p></td><td  ><p>32.9%</p></td><td  ><p>GM200</p></td><td  ><p>1000/1075 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>6GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>250W</p></td><td  ><p>GeForce GTX 980 Ti</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1660">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660</a></p></td><td  ><p>32.8%</p></td><td  ><p>TU116</p></td><td  ><p>1530/1785 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>6GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>120W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-8900246-12920453?sid=tomshardware-&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814932138">Geforce GTX 1660</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+R9+Fury+X">AMD Radeon R9 Fury X</a></p></td><td  ><p>32.7%</p></td><td  ><p>Fiji</p></td><td  ><p>1050 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB HBM</p></td><td  ><p>275W</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Radeon R9 Fury X</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+590">AMD Radeon RX 590</a></p></td><td  ><p>32.4%</p></td><td  ><p>Polaris 30</p></td><td  ><p>1469/1545 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>225W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/XFX-RX-590P8DFD6-Radeon-1580MHz-Graphic/dp/B07JQDKNXS?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware-deal&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Radeon RX 590</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+5500+XT+8GB">AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 8GB</a></p></td><td  ><p>31.8%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 14</p></td><td  ><p>?/1717 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>130W</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 8GB</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+580+8GB">AMD Radeon RX 580 8GB</a></p></td><td  ><p>30.9%</p></td><td  ><p>Polaris 20</p></td><td  ><p>1257/1340 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>185W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/MSI-Radeon-RX-580-8G/dp/B078Q78L93?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware-deal&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">AMD Radeon RX 580</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1650+Super">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650 Super</a></p></td><td  ><p>28.5%</p></td><td  ><p>TU116</p></td><td  ><p>1530/1725 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>100W</p></td><td  ><p>Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650 Super</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+5500+XT+4GB">AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 4GB</a></p></td><td  ><p>28.4%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 14</p></td><td  ><p>?/1717 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>130W</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 4GB</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+6500+XT">AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT</a></p></td><td  ><p>27.7%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 24</p></td><td  ><p>2610/2815 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>107W</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+R9+390">AMD Radeon R9 390</a></p></td><td  ><p>27.2%</p></td><td  ><p>Hawaii</p></td><td  ><p>1000 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>275W</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Radeon R9 390</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1060+6GB">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB</a></p></td><td  ><p>26.5%</p></td><td  ><p>GP106</p></td><td  ><p>1506/1708 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>6GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>120W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/EVGA-GeForce-Support-Graphics-06G-P4-6262-KR/dp/B01LZ3VNG0?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+980">Nvidia GeForce GTX 980</a></p></td><td  ><p>26.4%</p></td><td  ><p>GM204</p></td><td  ><p>1126/1216 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>165W</p></td><td  ><p>Nvidia GeForce GTX 980</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+570+4GB">AMD Radeon RX 570 4GB</a></p></td><td  ><p>25.2%</p></td><td  ><p>Polaris 20</p></td><td  ><p>1168/1244 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>150W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814125966">Radeon RX 570</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GTX+1650+GDDR6">Nvidia GTX 1650 GDDR6</a></p></td><td  ><p>23.8%</p></td><td  ><p>TU117</p></td><td  ><p>1410/1590 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>75W</p></td><td  ><p>GeForce GTX 1650 GDDR6</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1060+3GB">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 3GB</a></p></td><td  ><p>22.3%</p></td><td  ><p>GP106</p></td><td  ><p>1506/1708 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>3GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>120W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814487263">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 3GB</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+970">Nvidia GeForce GTX 970</a></p></td><td  ><p>22.1%</p></td><td  ><p>GM204</p></td><td  ><p>1050/1178 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>145W</p></td><td  ><p>Nvidia GeForce GTX 970</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1650">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650</a></p></td><td  ><p>20.9%</p></td><td  ><p>TU117</p></td><td  ><p>1485/1665 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>75W</p></td><td  ><p>GeForce GTX 1650 Gaming OC 4G</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1050+Ti">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050 Ti</a></p></td><td  ><p>16.1%</p></td><td  ><p>GP107</p></td><td  ><p>1290/1392 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>75W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814126170">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050 Ti</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+560+4GB">AMD Radeon RX 560 4GB</a></p></td><td  ><p>12.5%</p></td><td  ><p>Polaris 21</p></td><td  ><p>1175/1275 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>80W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/powercolor-radeon-rx-560-axrx-560-4gbd5-dha/p/N82E16814131732">PowerColor Red Dragon Radeon RX 560</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1050">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050</a></p></td><td  ><p>12.2%</p></td><td  ><p>GP107</p></td><td  ><p>1354/1455 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>2GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>75W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/gigabyte-geforce-gtx-1050-gv-n1050oc-2gd/p/N82E16814125919">Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1050</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Ryzen+7+5700G">AMD Vega 8 (R7 5700G)</a></p></td><td  ><p>9.5%</p></td><td  ><p>Vega 8</p></td><td  ><p>2000 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>Shared</p></td><td  ><p>N/A</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Ryzen+5+5600G">AMD Vega 7 (R5 5600G)</a></p></td><td  ><p>8.8%</p></td><td  ><p>Vega 7</p></td><td  ><p>1900 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>Shared</p></td><td  ><p>N/A</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+550">AMD Radeon RX 550</a></p></td><td  ><p>8.0%</p></td><td  ><p>Polaris 22</p></td><td  ><p>1100/1183 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>50W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/powercolor-radeon-rx-550-axrx-550-2gbd5-dha-oc/p/N82E16814131738">PowerColor Radeon RX 550</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GT+1030">Nvidia GeForce GT 1030</a></p></td><td  ><p>6.7%</p></td><td  ><p>GP108</p></td><td  ><p>1228/1468 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>2GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>30W</p></td><td  ><p>Nvidia GeForce GT 1030</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Ryzen+5+3400G">AMD Vega 11 (R5 3400G)</a></p></td><td  ><p>5.5%</p></td><td  ><p>Vega 11</p></td><td  ><p>1400 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>Shared</p></td><td  ><p>N/A</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-3400G-8-Thread-Processor/dp/B07SXNDKNM?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">AMD Ryzen 5 3400G</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Ryzen+3+3200G">AMD Vega 8 (R3 3200G)</a></p></td><td  ><p>4.9%</p></td><td  ><p>Vega 8</p></td><td  ><p>1250 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>Shared</p></td><td  ><p>N/A</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-3200G-Unlocked-Processor/dp/B07STGHZK8?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">AMD Ryzen 3 3200G</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.bestbuy.com/site/cyberpowerpc-gaming-desktop-intel-core-i5-11400f-8gb-memory-intel-iris-xe-500gb-ssd-black/6462676.p?skuId=6462676">Intel Iris Xe DG1</a></p></td><td  ><p>4.4%</p></td><td  ><p>Xe DG1</p></td><td  ><p>1550 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB LPDDR4X</p></td><td  ><p>30W</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Intel+Core+i7-1065G7">Intel Iris Plus (i7-1065G7)</a></p></td><td  ><p>3.0%</p></td><td  ><p>Gen11 ICL-U</p></td><td  ><p>1100 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>Shared</p></td><td  ><p>N/A</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/HP-15-Micro-Edge-Touchscreen-Quard-Core/dp/B08QM7YWSG?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Intel Core i7-1065G7</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Intel+Core+i7-10700K">Intel UHD Graphics 630 (i7-10700K)</a></p></td><td  ><p>1.8%</p></td><td  ><p>Gen9.5 CFL</p></td><td  ><p>1200 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>2x8GB DDR4-3200</p></td><td  ><p>N/A</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i7-10700K-Processor-Unlocked-BX8070110700K/dp/B086ML4XSB?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Intel Core i7-10700K</a></p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><h2 id="ancient-legacy-gpu-hierarchy">Ancient Legacy GPU Hierarchy</h2><p>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.<br><br>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.<br><br>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.</p><div ><table><caption>Legacy GPU Hierarchy (Sorted by GigaFLOPS)</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p>GPU</p></th><th  ><p>Release Date</p></th><th  ><p>Architecture</p></th><th  ><p>Shaders</p></th><th  ><p>Clockspeed</p></th><th  ><p>GFLOPS (GOps)</p></th><th  ><p>MSRP (Revised)</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5090"><strong>GeForce RTX 5090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2025</p></td><td  ><p>GB202</p></td><td  ><p>21760</p></td><td  ><p>2407</p></td><td  ><p>104,753</p></td><td  ><p>$1,999</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4090"><strong>GeForce RTX 4090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2022</p></td><td  ><p>AD102</p></td><td  ><p>16384</p></td><td  ><p>2520</p></td><td  ><p>82,575</p></td><td  ><p>$1,599 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4090D"><strong>GeForce RTX 4090D</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2023</p></td><td  ><p>AD102</p></td><td  ><p>14592</p></td><td  ><p>2520</p></td><td  ><p>73,544</p></td><td  ><p>$1,599 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7900+XTX"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 XTX</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2022</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 31</p></td><td  ><p>6144</p></td><td  ><p>2500</p></td><td  ><p>61,440</p></td><td  ><p>$999 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5080"><strong>GeForce RTX 5080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2025</p></td><td  ><p>GB203</p></td><td  ><p>10752</p></td><td  ><p>2617</p></td><td  ><p>56,726</p></td><td  ><p>$999</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4080+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 4080 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2024</p></td><td  ><p>AD103</p></td><td  ><p>10240</p></td><td  ><p>2550</p></td><td  ><p>52,224</p></td><td  ><p>$999 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7900+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2022</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 31</p></td><td  ><p>5376</p></td><td  ><p>2400</p></td><td  ><p>51,610</p></td><td  ><p>$899 ($749)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+9070+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 9070 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2025</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 48</p></td><td  ><p>4096</p></td><td  ><p>2970</p></td><td  ><p>48,660</p></td><td  ><p>$599</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4080"><strong>GeForce RTX 4080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2022</p></td><td  ><p>AD103</p></td><td  ><p>9728</p></td><td  ><p>2505</p></td><td  ><p>48,737</p></td><td  ><p>$1,199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7900+GRE"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 GRE</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2024</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 31</p></td><td  ><p>5120</p></td><td  ><p>2245</p></td><td  ><p>45,978</p></td><td  ><p>$549 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Ti+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2024</p></td><td  ><p>AD103</p></td><td  ><p>8448</p></td><td  ><p>2610</p></td><td  ><p>44,099</p></td><td  ><p>$799 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5070+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 5070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2025</p></td><td  ><p>GB203</p></td><td  ><p>8960</p></td><td  ><p>2452</p></td><td  ><p>43,940</p></td><td  ><p>$749</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2023</p></td><td  ><p>AD103</p></td><td  ><p>7680</p></td><td  ><p>2610</p></td><td  ><p>40,090</p></td><td  ><p>$799 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3090+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3090 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2022</p></td><td  ><p>GA102</p></td><td  ><p>10752</p></td><td  ><p>1860</p></td><td  ><p>39,997</p></td><td  ><p>$1,999 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7800+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7800 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2023</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 32</p></td><td  ><p>3840</p></td><td  ><p>2430</p></td><td  ><p>37,325</p></td><td  ><p>$499 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+9070"><strong>Radeon RX 9070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2025</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 48</p></td><td  ><p>3584</p></td><td  ><p>2520</p></td><td  ><p>36,127</p></td><td  ><p>$549</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3090"><strong>GeForce RTX 3090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2020</p></td><td  ><p>GA102</p></td><td  ><p>10496</p></td><td  ><p>1695</p></td><td  ><p>35,581</p></td><td  ><p>$1,499 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2024</p></td><td  ><p>AD104</p></td><td  ><p>7168</p></td><td  ><p>2475</p></td><td  ><p>35,482</p></td><td  ><p>$599 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7700+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2023</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 32</p></td><td  ><p>3456</p></td><td  ><p>2544</p></td><td  ><p>35,168</p></td><td  ><p>$449 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3080+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2021</p></td><td  ><p>GA102</p></td><td  ><p>10240</p></td><td  ><p>1665</p></td><td  ><p>34,099</p></td><td  ><p>$1,199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5070"><strong>GeForce RTX 5070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2025</p></td><td  ><p>GB205</p></td><td  ><p>6144</p></td><td  ><p>2512</p></td><td  ><p>30,876</p></td><td  ><p>$549</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3080+12GB"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080 12GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2022</p></td><td  ><p>GA102</p></td><td  ><p>8960</p></td><td  ><p>1710</p></td><td  ><p>30,643</p></td><td  ><p>$999 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3080"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2020</p></td><td  ><p>GA102</p></td><td  ><p>8704</p></td><td  ><p>1710</p></td><td  ><p>29,768</p></td><td  ><p>$699 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4070"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2023</p></td><td  ><p>AD104</p></td><td  ><p>5888</p></td><td  ><p>2475</p></td><td  ><p>29,146</p></td><td  ><p>$599 ($549)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5060+Ti+16GB"><strong>GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2025</p></td><td  ><p>GB206</p></td><td  ><p>4608</p></td><td  ><p>2572</p></td><td  ><p>23,704</p></td><td  ><p>$429</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5060+Ti+8GB"><strong>GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2025</p></td><td  ><p>GB206</p></td><td  ><p>4608</p></td><td  ><p>2572</p></td><td  ><p>23,704</p></td><td  ><p>$379</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6950+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6950 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2022</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 21</p></td><td  ><p>5120</p></td><td  ><p>2310</p></td><td  ><p>23,654</p></td><td  ><p>$1,099 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6900+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2020</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 21</p></td><td  ><p>5120</p></td><td  ><p>2250</p></td><td  ><p>23,040</p></td><td  ><p>$999 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7600+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2024</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 33</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>2755</p></td><td  ><p>22,569</p></td><td  ><p>$329 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4060+Ti+16GB"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2023</p></td><td  ><p>AD106</p></td><td  ><p>4352</p></td><td  ><p>2540</p></td><td  ><p>22,108</p></td><td  ><p>$499 ($449)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4060+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2023</p></td><td  ><p>AD106</p></td><td  ><p>4352</p></td><td  ><p>2540</p></td><td  ><p>22,108</p></td><td  ><p>$399 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7600"><strong>Radeon RX 7600</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2023</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 33</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>2655</p></td><td  ><p>21,750</p></td><td  ><p>$269 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3070+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2021</p></td><td  ><p>GA104</p></td><td  ><p>6144</p></td><td  ><p>1770</p></td><td  ><p>21,750</p></td><td  ><p>$599 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6800+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6800 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2020</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 21</p></td><td  ><p>4608</p></td><td  ><p>2250</p></td><td  ><p>20,736</p></td><td  ><p>$649 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3070"><strong>GeForce RTX 3070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2020</p></td><td  ><p>GA104</p></td><td  ><p>5888</p></td><td  ><p>1725</p></td><td  ><p>20,314</p></td><td  ><p>$499 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Intel+Arc+A770+16GB"><strong>Intel Arc A770 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2022</p></td><td  ><p>ACM-G10</p></td><td  ><p>4096</p></td><td  ><p>2400</p></td><td  ><p>19,661</p></td><td  ><p>$349 ($279)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Intel+Arc+A770+8GB"><strong>Intel Arc A770 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2022</p></td><td  ><p>ACM-G10</p></td><td  ><p>4096</p></td><td  ><p>2400</p></td><td  ><p>19,661</p></td><td  ><p>$329 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5060"><strong>GeForce RTX 5060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2025</p></td><td  ><p>GB206</p></td><td  ><p>3840</p></td><td  ><p>2497</p></td><td  ><p>19,177</p></td><td  ><p>$299</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Intel+Arc+A750"><strong>Intel Arc A750</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2022</p></td><td  ><p>ACM-G10</p></td><td  ><p>3584</p></td><td  ><p>2400</p></td><td  ><p>17,203</p></td><td  ><p>$289 ($199)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Titan+RTX"><strong>Nvidia Titan RTX</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2018</p></td><td  ><p>TU102</p></td><td  ><p>4608</p></td><td  ><p>1770</p></td><td  ><p>16,312</p></td><td  ><p>$2,499 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3060+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3060 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2020</p></td><td  ><p>GA104</p></td><td  ><p>4864</p></td><td  ><p>1665</p></td><td  ><p>16,197</p></td><td  ><p>$399 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6800"><strong>Radeon RX 6800</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2020</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 21</p></td><td  ><p>3840</p></td><td  ><p>2105</p></td><td  ><p>16,166</p></td><td  ><p>$579 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4060"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2023</p></td><td  ><p>AD107</p></td><td  ><p>3072</p></td><td  ><p>2460</p></td><td  ><p>15,114</p></td><td  ><p>$299 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Titan+V"><strong>Nvidia Titan V</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2017</p></td><td  ><p>GV100</p></td><td  ><p>5120</p></td><td  ><p>1455</p></td><td  ><p>14,899</p></td><td  ><p>$2,999 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Intel+Arc+A580"><strong>Intel Arc A580</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2023</p></td><td  ><p>ACM-G10</p></td><td  ><p>3072</p></td><td  ><p>2350</p></td><td  ><p>14,438</p></td><td  ><p>$179 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+2080+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 2080 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2018</p></td><td  ><p>TU102</p></td><td  ><p>4352</p></td><td  ><p>1545</p></td><td  ><p>13,448</p></td><td  ><p>$1,199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+VII"><strong>Radeon VII</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2019</p></td><td  ><p>Vega 20</p></td><td  ><p>3840</p></td><td  ><p>1750</p></td><td  ><p>13,440</p></td><td  ><p>$699 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6750+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6750 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2022</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 22</p></td><td  ><p>2560</p></td><td  ><p>2600</p></td><td  ><p>13,312</p></td><td  ><p>$549 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6700+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2021</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 22</p></td><td  ><p>2560</p></td><td  ><p>2581</p></td><td  ><p>13,215</p></td><td  ><p>$479 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3060"><strong>GeForce RTX 3060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2021</p></td><td  ><p>GA106</p></td><td  ><p>3584</p></td><td  ><p>1777</p></td><td  ><p>12,738</p></td><td  ><p>$329 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+Vega+64"><strong>Radeon RX Vega 64</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2017</p></td><td  ><p>Vega 10</p></td><td  ><p>4096</p></td><td  ><p>1546</p></td><td  ><p>12,665</p></td><td  ><p>$499 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+295X2"><strong>Radeon R9 295X2</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2014</p></td><td  ><p>Vesuvius (x2)</p></td><td  ><p>5632</p></td><td  ><p>1018</p></td><td  ><p>11,467</p></td><td  ><p>$1,499 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Titan+Xp"><strong>Nvidia Titan Xp</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2017</p></td><td  ><p>GP102</p></td><td  ><p>3840</p></td><td  ><p>1480</p></td><td  ><p>11,366</p></td><td  ><p>$1,199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1080+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 1080 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2017</p></td><td  ><p>GP102</p></td><td  ><p>3584</p></td><td  ><p>1582</p></td><td  ><p>11,340</p></td><td  ><p>$699 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+2080+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 2080 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2019</p></td><td  ><p>TU104</p></td><td  ><p>3072</p></td><td  ><p>1815</p></td><td  ><p>11,151</p></td><td  ><p>$699 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Titan+X+(Pascal)"><strong>Nvidia Titan X (Pascal)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2016</p></td><td  ><p>GP102</p></td><td  ><p>3584</p></td><td  ><p>1531</p></td><td  ><p>10,974</p></td><td  ><p>$1,199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6650+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6650 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2022</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 23</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>2635</p></td><td  ><p>10,793</p></td><td  ><p>$399 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6600+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2021</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 23</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>2589</p></td><td  ><p>10,605</p></td><td  ><p>$379 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+Vega+56"><strong>Radeon RX Vega 56</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2017</p></td><td  ><p>Vega 10</p></td><td  ><p>3584</p></td><td  ><p>1471</p></td><td  ><p>10,544</p></td><td  ><p>$399 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+Titan+Z"><strong>GeForce GTX Titan Z</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2014</p></td><td  ><p>2x GK110</p></td><td  ><p>5760</p></td><td  ><p>876</p></td><td  ><p>10,092</p></td><td  ><p>$2,999 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+2080"><strong>GeForce RTX 2080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2018</p></td><td  ><p>TU104</p></td><td  ><p>2944</p></td><td  ><p>1710</p></td><td  ><p>10,068</p></td><td  ><p>$699 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+5700+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 5700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2019</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 10</p></td><td  ><p>2560</p></td><td  ><p>1905</p></td><td  ><p>9,754</p></td><td  ><p>$399 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3050"><strong>GeForce RTX 3050</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2022</p></td><td  ><p>GA106</p></td><td  ><p>2560</p></td><td  ><p>1777</p></td><td  ><p>9,098</p></td><td  ><p>$249 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+2070+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 2070 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2019</p></td><td  ><p>TU104</p></td><td  ><p>2560</p></td><td  ><p>1770</p></td><td  ><p>9,062</p></td><td  ><p>$499 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6600"><strong>Radeon RX 6600</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2021</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 23</p></td><td  ><p>1792</p></td><td  ><p>2491</p></td><td  ><p>8,928</p></td><td  ><p>$329 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1080"><strong>GeForce GTX 1080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2016</p></td><td  ><p>GP104</p></td><td  ><p>2560</p></td><td  ><p>1733</p></td><td  ><p>8,873</p></td><td  ><p>$599 ($499)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+Fury+X"><strong>Radeon R9 Fury X</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2015</p></td><td  ><p>Fiji</p></td><td  ><p>4096</p></td><td  ><p>1050</p></td><td  ><p>8,602</p></td><td  ><p>$649 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+Nano"><strong>Radeon R9 Nano</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2015</p></td><td  ><p>Fiji</p></td><td  ><p>4096</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>8,192</p></td><td  ><p>$649 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7990"><strong>Radeon HD 7990</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2013</p></td><td  ><p>New Zealand (x2)</p></td><td  ><p>4096</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>8,192</p></td><td  ><p>$1,000 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1070+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 1070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2017</p></td><td  ><p>GP104</p></td><td  ><p>2432</p></td><td  ><p>1683</p></td><td  ><p>8,186</p></td><td  ><p>$449 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+5600+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 5600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2020</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 10</p></td><td  ><p>2304</p></td><td  ><p>1750</p></td><td  ><p>8,064</p></td><td  ><p>$279 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+5700"><strong>Radeon RX 5700</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2019</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 10</p></td><td  ><p>2304</p></td><td  ><p>1725</p></td><td  ><p>7,949</p></td><td  ><p>$249 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+2070"><strong>GeForce RTX 2070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2018</p></td><td  ><p>TU106</p></td><td  ><p>2304</p></td><td  ><p>1620</p></td><td  ><p>7,465</p></td><td  ><p>$499 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+2060+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 2060 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2019</p></td><td  ><p>TU106</p></td><td  ><p>2176</p></td><td  ><p>1650</p></td><td  ><p>7,181</p></td><td  ><p>$399 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+Fury"><strong>Radeon R9 Fury</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2015</p></td><td  ><p>Fiji</p></td><td  ><p>3584</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>7,168</p></td><td  ><p>$549 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+590"><strong>Radeon RX 590</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2018</p></td><td  ><p>Polaris 30</p></td><td  ><p>2304</p></td><td  ><p>1545</p></td><td  ><p>7,119</p></td><td  ><p>$279 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+Titan+X+(Maxwell)"><strong>GeForce GTX Titan X (Maxwell)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2015</p></td><td  ><p>GM200</p></td><td  ><p>3072</p></td><td  ><p>1075</p></td><td  ><p>6,605</p></td><td  ><p>$999 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1070"><strong>GeForce GTX 1070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2016</p></td><td  ><p>GP104</p></td><td  ><p>1920</p></td><td  ><p>1683</p></td><td  ><p>6,463</p></td><td  ><p>$379 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+2060"><strong>GeForce RTX 2060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2019</p></td><td  ><p>TU106</p></td><td  ><p>1920</p></td><td  ><p>1680</p></td><td  ><p>6,451</p></td><td  ><p>$349 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+690"><strong>GeForce GTX 690</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2012</p></td><td  ><p>2x GK104</p></td><td  ><p>3072</p></td><td  ><p>1019</p></td><td  ><p>6,261</p></td><td  ><p>$1,000 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+580+8GB"><strong>Radeon RX 580 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2017</p></td><td  ><p>Polaris 20</p></td><td  ><p>2304</p></td><td  ><p>1340</p></td><td  ><p>6,175</p></td><td  ><p>$229 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+580+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 580 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2017</p></td><td  ><p>Polaris 20</p></td><td  ><p>2304</p></td><td  ><p>1340</p></td><td  ><p>6,175</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+980+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 980 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2015</p></td><td  ><p>GM200</p></td><td  ><p>2816</p></td><td  ><p>1075</p></td><td  ><p>6,054</p></td><td  ><p>$649 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+390X"><strong>Radeon R9 390X</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2015</p></td><td  ><p>Grenada</p></td><td  ><p>2816</p></td><td  ><p>1050</p></td><td  ><p>5,914</p></td><td  ><p>$429 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+480+8GB"><strong>Radeon RX 480 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2016</p></td><td  ><p>Ellesmere</p></td><td  ><p>2304</p></td><td  ><p>1266</p></td><td  ><p>5,834</p></td><td  ><p>$239 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+480+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 480 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2016</p></td><td  ><p>Ellesmere</p></td><td  ><p>2304</p></td><td  ><p>1266</p></td><td  ><p>5,834</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6500+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6500 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2022</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 24</p></td><td  ><p>1024</p></td><td  ><p>2815</p></td><td  ><p>5,765</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+Titan+Black"><strong>GeForce GTX Titan Black</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2014</p></td><td  ><p>GK110</p></td><td  ><p>2880</p></td><td  ><p>980</p></td><td  ><p>5,645</p></td><td  ><p>$999 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+290X"><strong>Radeon R9 290X</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Hawaii</p></td><td  ><p>2816</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>5,632</p></td><td  ><p>$549 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1660+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 1660 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2019</p></td><td  ><p>TU116</p></td><td  ><p>1536</p></td><td  ><p>1770</p></td><td  ><p>5,437</p></td><td  ><p>$279 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+780+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 780 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2013</p></td><td  ><p>GK110</p></td><td  ><p>2880</p></td><td  ><p>928</p></td><td  ><p>5,345</p></td><td  ><p>$699 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+5500+XT+8GB"><strong>Radeon RX 5500 XT 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2019</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 14</p></td><td  ><p>1408</p></td><td  ><p>1845</p></td><td  ><p>5,196</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+5500+XT+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 5500 XT 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2019</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 14</p></td><td  ><p>1408</p></td><td  ><p>1845</p></td><td  ><p>5,196</p></td><td  ><p>$169 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+390"><strong>Radeon R9 390</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2015</p></td><td  ><p>Grenada</p></td><td  ><p>2560</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>5,120</p></td><td  ><p>$329 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6990"><strong>Radeon HD 6990</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2011</p></td><td  ><p>Antilles (2x)</p></td><td  ><p>3072</p></td><td  ><p>830</p></td><td  ><p>5,100</p></td><td  ><p>$699 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+570+8GB"><strong>Radeon RX 570 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2017</p></td><td  ><p>Polaris 20</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>1244</p></td><td  ><p>5,095</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+570+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 570 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2017</p></td><td  ><p>Polaris 20</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>1244</p></td><td  ><p>5,095</p></td><td  ><p>$169 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1660+Super"><strong>GeForce GTX 1660 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2019</p></td><td  ><p>TU116</p></td><td  ><p>1408</p></td><td  ><p>1785</p></td><td  ><p>5,027</p></td><td  ><p>$229 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+980"><strong>GeForce GTX 980</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2014</p></td><td  ><p>GM204</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>1216</p></td><td  ><p>4,981</p></td><td  ><p>$549 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+470+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 470 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2016</p></td><td  ><p>Ellesmere</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>1206</p></td><td  ><p>4,940</p></td><td  ><p>$179 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Intel+Arc+A380"><strong>Intel Arc A380</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2022</p></td><td  ><p>ACM-G11</p></td><td  ><p>1024</p></td><td  ><p>2400</p></td><td  ><p>4,915</p></td><td  ><p>$139 ($119)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1660"><strong>GeForce GTX 1660</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2019</p></td><td  ><p>TU116</p></td><td  ><p>1408</p></td><td  ><p>1725</p></td><td  ><p>4,858</p></td><td  ><p>$219 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+290"><strong>Radeon R9 290</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Hawaii</p></td><td  ><p>2560</p></td><td  ><p>947</p></td><td  ><p>4,849</p></td><td  ><p>$399 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+Titan"><strong>GeForce GTX Titan</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2013</p></td><td  ><p>GK110</p></td><td  ><p>2688</p></td><td  ><p>876</p></td><td  ><p>4,709</p></td><td  ><p>$999 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5970"><strong>Radeon HD 5970</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2009</p></td><td  ><p>Hemlock (2x)</p></td><td  ><p>3200</p></td><td  ><p>725</p></td><td  ><p>4,640</p></td><td  ><p>$599 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1060+6GB"><strong>GeForce GTX 1060 6GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2016</p></td><td  ><p>GP106</p></td><td  ><p>1280</p></td><td  ><p>1708</p></td><td  ><p>4,372</p></td><td  ><p>$249 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7970+GHz+Edition"><strong>Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2012</p></td><td  ><p>Tahiti</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>1050</p></td><td  ><p>4,301</p></td><td  ><p>$500 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+780"><strong>GeForce GTX 780</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2013</p></td><td  ><p>GK110</p></td><td  ><p>2304</p></td><td  ><p>900</p></td><td  ><p>4,147</p></td><td  ><p>$649 ($499)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+280X"><strong>Radeon R9 280X</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Tahiti</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>4,096</p></td><td  ><p>$299 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1650+Super"><strong>GeForce GTX 1650 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2019</p></td><td  ><p>TU116</p></td><td  ><p>1280</p></td><td  ><p>1590</p></td><td  ><p>4,070</p></td><td  ><p>$159 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+380X"><strong>Radeon R9 380X</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2015</p></td><td  ><p>Tonga</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>970</p></td><td  ><p>3,973</p></td><td  ><p>$229 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1060+3GB"><strong>GeForce GTX 1060 3GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2016</p></td><td  ><p>GP106</p></td><td  ><p>1152</p></td><td  ><p>1708</p></td><td  ><p>3,935</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+970"><strong>GeForce GTX 970</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2014</p></td><td  ><p>GM204</p></td><td  ><p>1664</p></td><td  ><p>1178</p></td><td  ><p>3,920</p></td><td  ><p>$329 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+380"><strong>Radeon R9 380</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2015</p></td><td  ><p>Tonga</p></td><td  ><p>1792</p></td><td  ><p>970</p></td><td  ><p>3,476</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+280"><strong>Radeon R9 280</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2014</p></td><td  ><p>Tahiti</p></td><td  ><p>1792</p></td><td  ><p>933</p></td><td  ><p>3,344</p></td><td  ><p>$249 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+770"><strong>GeForce GTX 770</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2013</p></td><td  ><p>GK104</p></td><td  ><p>1536</p></td><td  ><p>1085</p></td><td  ><p>3,333</p></td><td  ><p>$399 ($329)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+285"><strong>Radeon R9 285</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2014</p></td><td  ><p>Tonga</p></td><td  ><p>1792</p></td><td  ><p>918</p></td><td  ><p>3,290</p></td><td  ><p>$249 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+680"><strong>GeForce GTX 680</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GK104</p></td><td  ><p>1536</p></td><td  ><p>1058</p></td><td  ><p>3,250</p></td><td  ><p>$500 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7870+XT"><strong>Radeon HD 7870 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2012</p></td><td  ><p>Tahiti</p></td><td  ><p>1536</p></td><td  ><p>975</p></td><td  ><p>2,995</p></td><td  ><p>$270 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1650"><strong>GeForce GTX 1650</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2019</p></td><td  ><p>TU117</p></td><td  ><p>896</p></td><td  ><p>1665</p></td><td  ><p>2,984</p></td><td  ><p>$149 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7950"><strong>Radeon HD 7950</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2012</p></td><td  ><p>Tahiti</p></td><td  ><p>1792</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>2,867</p></td><td  ><p>$450 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1650+GDDR6"><strong>GeForce GTX 1650 GDDR6</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2020</p></td><td  ><p>TU117</p></td><td  ><p>896</p></td><td  ><p>1590</p></td><td  ><p>2,849</p></td><td  ><p>$149 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5870"><strong>Radeon HD 5870</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2009</p></td><td  ><p>Cypress</p></td><td  ><p>1600</p></td><td  ><p>850</p></td><td  ><p>2,720</p></td><td  ><p>$379 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6970"><strong>Radeon HD 6970</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Cayman</p></td><td  ><p>1536</p></td><td  ><p>880</p></td><td  ><p>2,703</p></td><td  ><p>$369 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+270X"><strong>Radeon R9 270X</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Pitcairn</p></td><td  ><p>1280</p></td><td  ><p>1050</p></td><td  ><p>2,688</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+760+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 760 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2013</p></td><td  ><p>GK104</p></td><td  ><p>1344</p></td><td  ><p>980</p></td><td  ><p>2,634</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+670"><strong>GeForce GTX 670</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GK104</p></td><td  ><p>1344</p></td><td  ><p>980</p></td><td  ><p>2,634</p></td><td  ><p>$400 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+660+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 660 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GK104</p></td><td  ><p>1344</p></td><td  ><p>980</p></td><td  ><p>2,634</p></td><td  ><p>$300 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+560+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 560 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2017</p></td><td  ><p>Baffin</p></td><td  ><p>1024</p></td><td  ><p>1275</p></td><td  ><p>2,611</p></td><td  ><p>$99 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+370X"><strong>Radeon R9 370X</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2015</p></td><td  ><p>Pitcairn</p></td><td  ><p>1280</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>2,560</p></td><td  ><p>$179 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7870"><strong>Radeon HD 7870</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2012</p></td><td  ><p>Pitcairn</p></td><td  ><p>1280</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>2,560</p></td><td  ><p>$350 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+590"><strong>GeForce GTX 590</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2011</p></td><td  ><p>2x GF110</p></td><td  ><p>1024</p></td><td  ><p>607</p></td><td  ><p>2,486</p></td><td  ><p>$699 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+960"><strong>GeForce GTX 960</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2015</p></td><td  ><p>GM206</p></td><td  ><p>1024</p></td><td  ><p>1178</p></td><td  ><p>2,413</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4870+X2"><strong>Radeon HD 4870 X2</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2008</p></td><td  ><p>2x RV770</p></td><td  ><p>1600</p></td><td  ><p>750</p></td><td  ><p>2,400</p></td><td  ><p>$449 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+760"><strong>GeForce GTX 760</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2013</p></td><td  ><p>GK104</p></td><td  ><p>1152</p></td><td  ><p>1033</p></td><td  ><p>2,380</p></td><td  ><p>$249 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+270"><strong>Radeon R9 270</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Pitcairn</p></td><td  ><p>1280</p></td><td  ><p>925</p></td><td  ><p>2,368</p></td><td  ><p>$179 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6950+2GB"><strong>Radeon HD 6950 2GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Cayman</p></td><td  ><p>1408</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>2,253</p></td><td  ><p>$299 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6950+1GB"><strong>Radeon HD 6950 1GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Cayman</p></td><td  ><p>1408</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>2,253</p></td><td  ><p>$259 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+460+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 460 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2016</p></td><td  ><p>Baffin</p></td><td  ><p>896</p></td><td  ><p>1200</p></td><td  ><p>2,150</p></td><td  ><p>$139 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+460+2GB"><strong>Radeon RX 460 2GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2016</p></td><td  ><p>Baffin</p></td><td  ><p>896</p></td><td  ><p>1200</p></td><td  ><p>2,150</p></td><td  ><p>$109 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1050+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 1050 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2016</p></td><td  ><p>GP107</p></td><td  ><p>768</p></td><td  ><p>1392</p></td><td  ><p>2,138</p></td><td  ><p>$139 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+560+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 560 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2017</p></td><td  ><p>Baffin</p></td><td  ><p>896</p></td><td  ><p>1175</p></td><td  ><p>2,106</p></td><td  ><p>$99 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5850"><strong>Radeon HD 5850</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2009</p></td><td  ><p>Cypress</p></td><td  ><p>1440</p></td><td  ><p>725</p></td><td  ><p>2,088</p></td><td  ><p>$259 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6870"><strong>Radeon HD 6870</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Barts</p></td><td  ><p>1120</p></td><td  ><p>900</p></td><td  ><p>2,016</p></td><td  ><p>$239 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4850+X2"><strong>Radeon HD 4850 X2</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2008</p></td><td  ><p>2x RV770</p></td><td  ><p>1600</p></td><td  ><p>625</p></td><td  ><p>2,000</p></td><td  ><p>$339 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+370"><strong>Radeon R9 370</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2015</p></td><td  ><p>Pitcairn</p></td><td  ><p>1024</p></td><td  ><p>975</p></td><td  ><p>1,997</p></td><td  ><p>$149 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+660"><strong>GeForce GTX 660</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GK106</p></td><td  ><p>960</p></td><td  ><p>1032</p></td><td  ><p>1,981</p></td><td  ><p>$230 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R7+260X"><strong>Radeon R7 260X</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Bonaire</p></td><td  ><p>896</p></td><td  ><p>1100</p></td><td  ><p>1,971</p></td><td  ><p>$139 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1050"><strong>GeForce GTX 1050</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2016</p></td><td  ><p>GP107</p></td><td  ><p>640</p></td><td  ><p>1518</p></td><td  ><p>1,943</p></td><td  ><p>$109 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R7+265"><strong>Radeon R7 265</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2014</p></td><td  ><p>Pitcairn</p></td><td  ><p>1024</p></td><td  ><p>925</p></td><td  ><p>1,894</p></td><td  ><p>$149 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+950"><strong>GeForce GTX 950</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2015</p></td><td  ><p>GM206</p></td><td  ><p>768</p></td><td  ><p>1188</p></td><td  ><p>1,825</p></td><td  ><p>$159 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7790"><strong>Radeon HD 7790</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Pitcairn</p></td><td  ><p>896</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>1,792</p></td><td  ><p>$150 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5830"><strong>Radeon HD 5830</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Cypress</p></td><td  ><p>1120</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>1,792</p></td><td  ><p>$239 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7850"><strong>Radeon HD 7850</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2012</p></td><td  ><p>Pitcairn</p></td><td  ><p>1024</p></td><td  ><p>860</p></td><td  ><p>1,761</p></td><td  ><p>$250 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R7+360"><strong>Radeon R7 360</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2015</p></td><td  ><p>Bonaire</p></td><td  ><p>768</p></td><td  ><p>1050</p></td><td  ><p>1,613</p></td><td  ><p>$109 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+650+Ti+Boost"><strong>GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2013</p></td><td  ><p>GK106</p></td><td  ><p>768</p></td><td  ><p>1032</p></td><td  ><p>1,585</p></td><td  ><p>$170 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+580"><strong>GeForce GTX 580</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF110</p></td><td  ><p>512</p></td><td  ><p>772</p></td><td  ><p>1,581</p></td><td  ><p>$499 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R7+260"><strong>Radeon R7 260</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Bonaire</p></td><td  ><p>768</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>1,536</p></td><td  ><p>$109 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+550"><strong>Radeon RX 550</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2017</p></td><td  ><p>Lexa</p></td><td  ><p>640</p></td><td  ><p>1183</p></td><td  ><p>1,514</p></td><td  ><p>$79 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6850"><strong>Radeon HD 6850</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Barts</p></td><td  ><p>960</p></td><td  ><p>775</p></td><td  ><p>1,488</p></td><td  ><p>$179 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+650+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 650 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GK106</p></td><td  ><p>768</p></td><td  ><p>928</p></td><td  ><p>1,425</p></td><td  ><p>$150 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+570"><strong>GeForce GTX 570</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF110</p></td><td  ><p>480</p></td><td  ><p>732</p></td><td  ><p>1,405</p></td><td  ><p>$349 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+750+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 750 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2014</p></td><td  ><p>GK107</p></td><td  ><p>640</p></td><td  ><p>1085</p></td><td  ><p>1,389</p></td><td  ><p>$149 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6770"><strong>Radeon HD 6770</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2011</p></td><td  ><p>Juniper</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>850</p></td><td  ><p>1,360</p></td><td  ><p>$129 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5770"><strong>Radeon HD 5770</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2009</p></td><td  ><p>Juniper</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>850</p></td><td  ><p>1,360</p></td><td  ><p>$159 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4890"><strong>Radeon HD 4890</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2009</p></td><td  ><p>RV790</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>850</p></td><td  ><p>1,360</p></td><td  ><p>$249 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+480"><strong>GeForce GTX 480</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF100</p></td><td  ><p>480</p></td><td  ><p>701</p></td><td  ><p>1,346</p></td><td  ><p>$499 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6790"><strong>Radeon HD 6790</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2011</p></td><td  ><p>Barts</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>840</p></td><td  ><p>1,344</p></td><td  ><p>$149 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+560+Ti+(448+Core)"><strong>GeForce GTX 560 Ti (448 Core)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2011</p></td><td  ><p>GF110</p></td><td  ><p>448</p></td><td  ><p>732</p></td><td  ><p>1,312</p></td><td  ><p>$289 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7770"><strong>Radeon HD 7770</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2012</p></td><td  ><p>Cape Verde</p></td><td  ><p>640</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>1,280</p></td><td  ><p>$160 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+560+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 560 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2011</p></td><td  ><p>GF114</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>822</p></td><td  ><p>1,263</p></td><td  ><p>$249 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4870"><strong>Radeon HD 4870</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV770</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>750</p></td><td  ><p>1,200</p></td><td  ><p>$299 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+1030+(GDDR5)"><strong>GeForce GT 1030 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2017</p></td><td  ><p>GP108</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>1468</p></td><td  ><p>1,127</p></td><td  ><p>$70 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+750"><strong>GeForce GTX 750</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2014</p></td><td  ><p>GK107</p></td><td  ><p>512</p></td><td  ><p>1085</p></td><td  ><p>1,111</p></td><td  ><p>$119 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+470"><strong>GeForce GTX 470</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF100</p></td><td  ><p>448</p></td><td  ><p>608</p></td><td  ><p>1,090</p></td><td  ><p>$349 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+560"><strong>GeForce GTX 560</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2011</p></td><td  ><p>GF114</p></td><td  ><p>336</p></td><td  ><p>810</p></td><td  ><p>1,089</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+1030+(DDR4)"><strong>GeForce GT 1030 (DDR4)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2018</p></td><td  ><p>GP108</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>1379</p></td><td  ><p>1,059</p></td><td  ><p>$79 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+3870+X2"><strong>Radeon HD 3870 X2</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2008</p></td><td  ><p>2x R680</p></td><td  ><p>640</p></td><td  ><p>825</p></td><td  ><p>1,056</p></td><td  ><p>$449 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6750"><strong>Radeon HD 6750</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2011</p></td><td  ><p>Juniper</p></td><td  ><p>720</p></td><td  ><p>700</p></td><td  ><p>1,008</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5750"><strong>Radeon HD 5750</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2009</p></td><td  ><p>Juniper</p></td><td  ><p>720</p></td><td  ><p>700</p></td><td  ><p>1,008</p></td><td  ><p>$129 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4850"><strong>Radeon HD 4850</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV770</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>625</p></td><td  ><p>1,000</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4770"><strong>Radeon HD 4770</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2009</p></td><td  ><p>RV740</p></td><td  ><p>640</p></td><td  ><p>750</p></td><td  ><p>960</p></td><td  ><p>$109 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R7+350"><strong>Radeon R7 350</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2016</p></td><td  ><p>Cape Verde</p></td><td  ><p>512</p></td><td  ><p>925</p></td><td  ><p>947</p></td><td  ><p>$89 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7750+(GDDR5)"><strong>Radeon HD 7750 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2012</p></td><td  ><p>Cape Verde</p></td><td  ><p>512</p></td><td  ><p>900</p></td><td  ><p>922</p></td><td  ><p>$110 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7750+(DDR3)"><strong>Radeon HD 7750 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2012</p></td><td  ><p>Cape Verde</p></td><td  ><p>512</p></td><td  ><p>900</p></td><td  ><p>922</p></td><td  ><p>$110 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+460+(256-bit)"><strong>GeForce GTX 460 (256-bit)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF104</p></td><td  ><p>336</p></td><td  ><p>675</p></td><td  ><p>907</p></td><td  ><p>$229 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+460+(192-bit)"><strong>GeForce GTX 460 (192-bit)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF104</p></td><td  ><p>336</p></td><td  ><p>675</p></td><td  ><p>907</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+465"><strong>GeForce GTX 465</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF100</p></td><td  ><p>352</p></td><td  ><p>608</p></td><td  ><p>856</p></td><td  ><p>$279 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+560+SE"><strong>GeForce GTX 560 SE</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GF114</p></td><td  ><p>288</p></td><td  ><p>736</p></td><td  ><p>848</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R7+250E"><strong>Radeon R7 250E</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Cape Verde</p></td><td  ><p>512</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>819</p></td><td  ><p>$109 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+650"><strong>GeForce GTX 650</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GK107</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>1058</p></td><td  ><p>813</p></td><td  ><p>$110 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R7+250+(GDDR5)"><strong>Radeon R7 250 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Oland</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>1050</p></td><td  ><p>806</p></td><td  ><p>$99 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R7+250+(DDR3)"><strong>Radeon R7 250 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Oland</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>1050</p></td><td  ><p>806</p></td><td  ><p>$89 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6670+(GDDR5)"><strong>Radeon HD 6670 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2011</p></td><td  ><p>Turks</p></td><td  ><p>480</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>768</p></td><td  ><p>$109 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6670+(DDR3)"><strong>Radeon HD 6670 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2011</p></td><td  ><p>Turks</p></td><td  ><p>480</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>768</p></td><td  ><p>$99 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9800+GX2"><strong>GeForce 9800 GX2</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2008</p></td><td  ><p>2x G92</p></td><td  ><p>256</p></td><td  ><p>1500</p></td><td  ><p>768</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+740+(GDDR5)"><strong>GeForce GT 740 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2014</p></td><td  ><p>GK107</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>993</p></td><td  ><p>763</p></td><td  ><p>$99 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+740+(DDR3)"><strong>GeForce GT 740 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2014</p></td><td  ><p>GK107</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>993</p></td><td  ><p>763</p></td><td  ><p>$89 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+460+SE"><strong>GeForce GTX 460 SE</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF104</p></td><td  ><p>288</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>749</p></td><td  ><p>$160 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4830"><strong>Radeon HD 4830</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV770</p></td><td  ><p>640</p></td><td  ><p>575</p></td><td  ><p>736</p></td><td  ><p>$130 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+640+(GDDR5)"><strong>GeForce GT 640 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GK107</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>950</p></td><td  ><p>730</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+730+(64-bit,+GDDR5)"><strong>GeForce GT 730 (64-bit, GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2014</p></td><td  ><p>GK208</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>902</p></td><td  ><p>693</p></td><td  ><p>$79 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+730+(64-bit,+DDR3)"><strong>GeForce GT 730 (64-bit, DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2014</p></td><td  ><p>GK208</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>902</p></td><td  ><p>693</p></td><td  ><p>$69 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+550+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 550 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2011</p></td><td  ><p>GF116</p></td><td  ><p>192</p></td><td  ><p>900</p></td><td  ><p>691</p></td><td  ><p>$149 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6570+(GDDR5)"><strong>Radeon HD 6570 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2011</p></td><td  ><p>Turks</p></td><td  ><p>480</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>624</p></td><td  ><p>$89 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6570+(DDR3)"><strong>Radeon HD 6570 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2011</p></td><td  ><p>Turks</p></td><td  ><p>480</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>624</p></td><td  ><p>$79 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5670"><strong>Radeon HD 5670</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Redwood</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>775</p></td><td  ><p>620</p></td><td  ><p>$99 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7730+(GDDR5)"><strong>Radeon HD 7730 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Cape Verde</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>614</p></td><td  ><p>$60 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7730+(DDR3)"><strong>Radeon HD 7730 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Cape Verde</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>614</p></td><td  ><p>$60 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+640+(DDR3)"><strong>GeForce GT 640 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GK107</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>797</p></td><td  ><p>612</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTS+450"><strong>GeForce GTS 450</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF106</p></td><td  ><p>192</p></td><td  ><p>783</p></td><td  ><p>601</p></td><td  ><p>$129 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+295"><strong>GeForce GTX 295</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2009</p></td><td  ><p>2x GT200</p></td><td  ><p>480</p></td><td  ><p>576</p></td><td  ><p>553</p></td><td  ><p>$500 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5570+(GDDR5)"><strong>Radeon HD 5570 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Redwood</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>520</p></td><td  ><p>$80 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5570+(DDR3)"><strong>Radeon HD 5570 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Redwood</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>520</p></td><td  ><p>$80 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+545+(GDDR5)"><strong>GeForce GT 545 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2011</p></td><td  ><p>GF116</p></td><td  ><p>144</p></td><td  ><p>870</p></td><td  ><p>501</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R7+240"><strong>Radeon R7 240</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Oland</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>780</p></td><td  ><p>499</p></td><td  ><p>$69 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+3870"><strong>Radeon HD 3870</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV670</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>777</p></td><td  ><p>497</p></td><td  ><p>$349 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4670"><strong>Radeon HD 4670</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV730</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>750</p></td><td  ><p>480</p></td><td  ><p>$79 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+2900+XT"><strong>Radeon HD 2900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2007</p></td><td  ><p>R600</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>743</p></td><td  ><p>476</p></td><td  ><p>$399 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTS+250"><strong>GeForce GTS 250</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2009</p></td><td  ><p>G92b</p></td><td  ><p>128</p></td><td  ><p>1836</p></td><td  ><p>470</p></td><td  ><p>$150 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9800+GTX+"><strong>GeForce 9800 GTX+</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G92b</p></td><td  ><p>128</p></td><td  ><p>1836</p></td><td  ><p>470</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9800+GTX"><strong>GeForce 9800 GTX</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G92</p></td><td  ><p>128</p></td><td  ><p>1688</p></td><td  ><p>432</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+3850+(512MB)"><strong>Radeon HD 3850 (512MB)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV670</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>668</p></td><td  ><p>428</p></td><td  ><p>$189 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+3850+(256MB)"><strong>Radeon HD 3850 (256MB)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV670</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>668</p></td><td  ><p>428</p></td><td  ><p>$179 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+3830"><strong>Radeon HD 3830</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV670</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>668</p></td><td  ><p>428</p></td><td  ><p>$129 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4650+(DDR3)"><strong>Radeon HD 4650 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV730</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>416</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8800+GTS+(512MB)"><strong>GeForce 8800 GTS (512MB)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G92</p></td><td  ><p>128</p></td><td  ><p>1625</p></td><td  ><p>416</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+545+(DDR3)"><strong>GeForce GT 545 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2011</p></td><td  ><p>GF116</p></td><td  ><p>144</p></td><td  ><p>720</p></td><td  ><p>415</p></td><td  ><p>$149 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4650+(DDR2)"><strong>Radeon HD 4650 (DDR2)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV730</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>600</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+2900+Pro"><strong>Radeon HD 2900 Pro</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2007</p></td><td  ><p>R600</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>600</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>$300 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8800+Ultra"><strong>GeForce 8800 Ultra</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G80</p></td><td  ><p>128</p></td><td  ><p>1500</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5550+(GDDR5)"><strong>Radeon HD 5550 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Redwood</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>550</p></td><td  ><p>352</p></td><td  ><p>$70 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5550+(DDR3)"><strong>Radeon HD 5550 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Redwood</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>550</p></td><td  ><p>352</p></td><td  ><p>$70 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5550+(DDR2)"><strong>Radeon HD 5550 (DDR2)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Redwood</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>550</p></td><td  ><p>352</p></td><td  ><p>$70 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8800+GTX"><strong>GeForce 8800 GTX</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G80</p></td><td  ><p>128</p></td><td  ><p>1350</p></td><td  ><p>346</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+630+(DDR3)"><strong>GeForce GT 630 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GK107</p></td><td  ><p>192</p></td><td  ><p>875</p></td><td  ><p>336</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9800+GT"><strong>GeForce 9800 GT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G92a/G92b</p></td><td  ><p>112</p></td><td  ><p>1500</p></td><td  ><p>336</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8800+GT+(512MB)"><strong>GeForce 8800 GT (512MB)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G92</p></td><td  ><p>112</p></td><td  ><p>1500</p></td><td  ><p>336</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8800+GT+(256MB)"><strong>GeForce 8800 GT (256MB)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G92</p></td><td  ><p>112</p></td><td  ><p>1500</p></td><td  ><p>336</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+285"><strong>GeForce GTX 285</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2009</p></td><td  ><p>GT200</p></td><td  ><p>240</p></td><td  ><p>648</p></td><td  ><p>311</p></td><td  ><p>$400 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+630+(GDDR5)"><strong>GeForce GT 630 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GF108</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>810</p></td><td  ><p>311</p></td><td  ><p>$80 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+440+(GDDR5)"><strong>GeForce GT 440 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2011</p></td><td  ><p>GF108</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>810</p></td><td  ><p>311</p></td><td  ><p>$100 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+440+(GDDR3)"><strong>GeForce GT 440 (GDDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2011</p></td><td  ><p>GF108</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>810</p></td><td  ><p>311</p></td><td  ><p>$100 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+275"><strong>GeForce GTX 275</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2009</p></td><td  ><p>GT200</p></td><td  ><p>240</p></td><td  ><p>633</p></td><td  ><p>304</p></td><td  ><p>$250 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+280"><strong>GeForce GTX 280</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2008</p></td><td  ><p>GT200</p></td><td  ><p>240</p></td><td  ><p>602</p></td><td  ><p>289</p></td><td  ><p>$650 ($430)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+2900+GT"><strong>Radeon HD 2900 GT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2007</p></td><td  ><p>R600</p></td><td  ><p>240</p></td><td  ><p>600</p></td><td  ><p>288</p></td><td  ><p>$200 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+730+(128-bit,+DDR3)"><strong>GeForce GT 730 (128-bit, DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2014</p></td><td  ><p>GF108</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>700</p></td><td  ><p>269</p></td><td  ><p>$69 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+530"><strong>GeForce GT 530</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2011</p></td><td  ><p>GF118</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>700</p></td><td  ><p>269</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+430"><strong>GeForce GT 430</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF108</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>700</p></td><td  ><p>269</p></td><td  ><p>$79 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9600+GSO"><strong>GeForce 9600 GSO</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G92</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>1375</p></td><td  ><p>264</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8800+GS"><strong>GeForce 8800 GS</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G92</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>1375</p></td><td  ><p>264</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+240+(GDDR5)"><strong>GeForce GT 240 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2009</p></td><td  ><p>GT215</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>1340</p></td><td  ><p>257</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+240+(DDR3)"><strong>GeForce GT 240 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2009</p></td><td  ><p>GT215</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>1340</p></td><td  ><p>257</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+260"><strong>GeForce GTX 260</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2008</p></td><td  ><p>GT200</p></td><td  ><p>216</p></td><td  ><p>576</p></td><td  ><p>249</p></td><td  ><p>$300 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6450"><strong>Radeon HD 6450</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2011</p></td><td  ><p>Caicos</p></td><td  ><p>160</p></td><td  ><p>750</p></td><td  ><p>240</p></td><td  ><p>$55 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8800+GTS+(640MB)"><strong>GeForce 8800 GTS (640MB)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G80</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>1188</p></td><td  ><p>228</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8800+GTS+(320MB)"><strong>GeForce 8800 GTS (320MB)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G80</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>1188</p></td><td  ><p>228</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+260"><strong>GeForce GTX 260</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2008</p></td><td  ><p>GT200</p></td><td  ><p>192</p></td><td  ><p>576</p></td><td  ><p>221</p></td><td  ><p>$400 ($270)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9600+GT"><strong>GeForce 9600 GT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G94</p></td><td  ><p>64</p></td><td  ><p>1625</p></td><td  ><p>208</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R5+230"><strong>Radeon R5 230</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2014</p></td><td  ><p>Caicos</p></td><td  ><p>160</p></td><td  ><p>625</p></td><td  ><p>200</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+2600+XT"><strong>Radeon HD 2600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV630</p></td><td  ><p>120</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>192</p></td><td  ><p>$149 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+3650+(DDR3)"><strong>Radeon HD 3650 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV635</p></td><td  ><p>120</p></td><td  ><p>725</p></td><td  ><p>174</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+3650+(DDR2)"><strong>Radeon HD 3650 (DDR2)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV635</p></td><td  ><p>120</p></td><td  ><p>725</p></td><td  ><p>174</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+520"><strong>GeForce GT 520</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2011</p></td><td  ><p>GF119</p></td><td  ><p>48</p></td><td  ><p>810</p></td><td  ><p>156</p></td><td  ><p>$59 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+2600+Pro"><strong>Radeon HD 2600 Pro</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV630</p></td><td  ><p>120</p></td><td  ><p>600</p></td><td  ><p>144</p></td><td  ><p>$99 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+220+(DDR3)"><strong>GeForce GT 220 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2009</p></td><td  ><p>GT216</p></td><td  ><p>48</p></td><td  ><p>1360</p></td><td  ><p>131</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+220+(DDR2)"><strong>GeForce GT 220 (DDR2)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2009</p></td><td  ><p>GT216</p></td><td  ><p>48</p></td><td  ><p>1335</p></td><td  ><p>128</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5450"><strong>Radeon HD 5450</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Cedar</p></td><td  ><p>80</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>104</p></td><td  ><p>$50 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4550"><strong>Radeon HD 4550</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV710</p></td><td  ><p>80</p></td><td  ><p>600</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4350"><strong>Radeon HD 4350</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV710</p></td><td  ><p>80</p></td><td  ><p>600</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8600+GTS"><strong>GeForce 8600 GTS</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G84</p></td><td  ><p>32</p></td><td  ><p>1450</p></td><td  ><p>93</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9500+GT+(GDDR3)"><strong>GeForce 9500 GT (GDDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G96</p></td><td  ><p>32</p></td><td  ><p>1400</p></td><td  ><p>90</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9500+GT+(DDR2)"><strong>GeForce 9500 GT (DDR2)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G96</p></td><td  ><p>32</p></td><td  ><p>1400</p></td><td  ><p>90</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8600+GT+(GDDR3)"><strong>GeForce 8600 GT (GDDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G84</p></td><td  ><p>32</p></td><td  ><p>1188</p></td><td  ><p>76</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8600+GT+(DDR2)"><strong>GeForce 8600 GT (DDR2)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G84</p></td><td  ><p>32</p></td><td  ><p>1188</p></td><td  ><p>76</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+420"><strong>GeForce GT 420</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF108</p></td><td  ><p>48</p></td><td  ><p>700</p></td><td  ><p>67</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+2400+XT"><strong>Radeon HD 2400 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV610</p></td><td  ><p>40</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>52</p></td><td  ><p>$55 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9400+GT"><strong>GeForce 9400 GT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G96</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>1400</p></td><td  ><p>45</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+2400+Pro"><strong>Radeon HD 2400 Pro</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV610</p></td><td  ><p>40</p></td><td  ><p>525</p></td><td  ><p>42</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+2300"><strong>Radeon HD 2300</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV610</p></td><td  ><p>40</p></td><td  ><p>525</p></td><td  ><p>42</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8600+GS"><strong>GeForce 8600 GS</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G84</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>1180</p></td><td  ><p>38</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1950+XTX+*"><strong>Radeon X1950 XTX *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2006</p></td><td  ><p>R580+</p></td><td  ><p>48</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>31.2</p></td><td  ><p>$449 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1900+XTX+*"><strong>Radeon X1900 XTX *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2006</p></td><td  ><p>R580</p></td><td  ><p>48</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>31.2</p></td><td  ><p>$649 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1950+XT+*"><strong>Radeon X1950 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2006</p></td><td  ><p>R580+</p></td><td  ><p>48</p></td><td  ><p>625</p></td><td  ><p>30.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1900+XT+*"><strong>Radeon X1900 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2006</p></td><td  ><p>R580</p></td><td  ><p>48</p></td><td  ><p>625</p></td><td  ><p>30.0</p></td><td  ><p>$549 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8500+GT"><strong>GeForce 8500 GT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G86</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>900</p></td><td  ><p>29</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8400+GS"><strong>GeForce 8400 GS</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G86</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>900</p></td><td  ><p>29</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7950+GX2+*"><strong>GeForce 7950 GX2 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2006</p></td><td  ><p>2x G71</p></td><td  ><p>48</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>24.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9300+GS"><strong>GeForce 9300 GS</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G98</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>1400</p></td><td  ><p>22</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9300+GE"><strong>GeForce 9300 GE</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G98</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>1300</p></td><td  ><p>21</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1950+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon X1950 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2006</p></td><td  ><p>RV570</p></td><td  ><p>36</p></td><td  ><p>575</p></td><td  ><p>20.7</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1900+GT+*"><strong>Radeon X1900 GT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2006</p></td><td  ><p>R580</p></td><td  ><p>36</p></td><td  ><p>575</p></td><td  ><p>20.7</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1950+GT+*"><strong>Radeon X1950 GT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV570</p></td><td  ><p>36</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>18.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7900+GTX+*"><strong>GeForce 7900 GTX *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G71</p></td><td  ><p>24</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>15.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7900+GTO+*"><strong>GeForce 7900 GTO *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G71</p></td><td  ><p>24</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>15.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8300+GS"><strong>GeForce 8300 GS</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G86</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>900</p></td><td  ><p>14</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7950+GT+*"><strong>GeForce 7950 GT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G71</p></td><td  ><p>24</p></td><td  ><p>550</p></td><td  ><p>13.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7800+GTX+(512MB)+*"><strong>GeForce 7800 GTX (512MB) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2005</p></td><td  ><p>G70</p></td><td  ><p>24</p></td><td  ><p>550</p></td><td  ><p>13.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1650+XT+*"><strong>Radeon X1650 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2006</p></td><td  ><p>RV560</p></td><td  ><p>24</p></td><td  ><p>525</p></td><td  ><p>12.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7900+GT+*"><strong>GeForce 7900 GT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G71</p></td><td  ><p>24</p></td><td  ><p>450</p></td><td  ><p>10.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7800+GTX+(256MB)+*"><strong>GeForce 7800 GTX (256MB) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2005</p></td><td  ><p>G70</p></td><td  ><p>24</p></td><td  ><p>430</p></td><td  ><p>10.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1800+XT+*"><strong>Radeon X1800 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2005</p></td><td  ><p>R520</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>625</p></td><td  ><p>10.0</p></td><td  ><p>$549 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1650+GT+*"><strong>Radeon X1650 GT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV560</p></td><td  ><p>24</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>9.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7900+GS+*"><strong>GeForce 7900 GS *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G71</p></td><td  ><p>20</p></td><td  ><p>450</p></td><td  ><p>9.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X850+XT+Platinum+*"><strong>Radeon X850 XT Platinum *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2004</p></td><td  ><p>R480</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>540</p></td><td  ><p>8.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X850+XT+*"><strong>Radeon X850 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2004</p></td><td  ><p>R480</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>520</p></td><td  ><p>8.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X800+XT+Platinum+*"><strong>Radeon X800 XT Platinum *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2004</p></td><td  ><p>R423</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>520</p></td><td  ><p>8.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X800+XT+*"><strong>Radeon X800 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2004</p></td><td  ><p>R423</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>8.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1800+XL+*"><strong>Radeon X1800 XL *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2005</p></td><td  ><p>R520</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>8.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7800+GT+*"><strong>GeForce 7800 GT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2005</p></td><td  ><p>G70</p></td><td  ><p>20</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>8.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1650+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon X1650 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2006</p></td><td  ><p>RV535</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>600</p></td><td  ><p>7.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1600+XT+*"><strong>Radeon X1600 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2005</p></td><td  ><p>RV530</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>590</p></td><td  ><p>7.1</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7600+GT+*"><strong>GeForce 7600 GT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G73</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>560</p></td><td  ><p>6.7</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X800+XL+*"><strong>Radeon X800 XL *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2004</p></td><td  ><p>R430</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>6.4</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6800+Ultra+*"><strong>GeForce 6800 Ultra *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2004</p></td><td  ><p>NV45</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>6.4</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X850+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon X850 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2004</p></td><td  ><p>R480</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>507</p></td><td  ><p>6.1</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1800+GTO+*"><strong>Radeon X1800 GTO *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2006</p></td><td  ><p>R520</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>6.0</p></td><td  ><p>$249 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1600+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon X1600 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2005</p></td><td  ><p>RV530</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>6.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1300+XT+*"><strong>Radeon X1300 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2006</p></td><td  ><p>RV530</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>6.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7800+GS+*"><strong>GeForce 7800 GS *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G70</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>375</p></td><td  ><p>6.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X800+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon X800 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2004</p></td><td  ><p>R423</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>475</p></td><td  ><p>5.7</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6800+GT+*"><strong>GeForce 6800 GT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2004</p></td><td  ><p>NV45</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>350</p></td><td  ><p>5.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6800+GS+(PCIe)+*"><strong>GeForce 6800 GS (PCIe) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2005</p></td><td  ><p>NV42</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>425</p></td><td  ><p>5.1</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X800+GTO+(256MB)+*"><strong>Radeon X800 GTO (256MB) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2005</p></td><td  ><p>R423/R480</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>4.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X800+GTO+(128MB)+*"><strong>Radeon X800 GTO (128MB) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2005</p></td><td  ><p>R423/R480</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>4.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7600+GS+*"><strong>GeForce 7600 GS *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G73</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>4.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X800+*"><strong>Radeon X800 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2004</p></td><td  ><p>R430</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>392</p></td><td  ><p>4.7</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6800+GS+(AGP)+*"><strong>GeForce 6800 GS (AGP) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2005</p></td><td  ><p>NV40</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>350</p></td><td  ><p>4.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6600+GT+*"><strong>GeForce 6600 GT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2004</p></td><td  ><p>NV43</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>4.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6800+*"><strong>GeForce 6800 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2004</p></td><td  ><p>NV41/NV42</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>3.9</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X800+GT+*"><strong>Radeon X800 GT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2005</p></td><td  ><p>R423/R480</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>475</p></td><td  ><p>3.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X800+SE+*"><strong>Radeon X800 SE *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2004</p></td><td  ><p>R420</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>425</p></td><td  ><p>3.4</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X700+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon X700 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2004</p></td><td  ><p>RV410</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>425</p></td><td  ><p>3.4</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9800+XT+*"><strong>Radeon 9800 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2003</p></td><td  ><p>R360</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>412</p></td><td  ><p>3.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X700+*"><strong>Radeon X700 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2005</p></td><td  ><p>RV410</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>3.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9800+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon 9800 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>R350</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>380</p></td><td  ><p>3.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7300+GT+(GDDR3)+*"><strong>GeForce 7300 GT (GDDR3) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G73</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>350</p></td><td  ><p>2.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7300+GT+(DDR2)+*"><strong>GeForce 7300 GT (DDR2) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G73</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>350</p></td><td  ><p>2.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9800+SE+(128-bit)+*"><strong>Radeon 9800 SE (128-bit) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>R350</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>2.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9800+*"><strong>Radeon 9800 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>R350</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>2.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9700+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon 9700 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2002</p></td><td  ><p>R300</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>2.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6800+XT+*"><strong>GeForce 6800 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2005</p></td><td  ><p>NV42</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>2.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6800+LE+*"><strong>GeForce 6800 LE *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2005</p></td><td  ><p>NV41/NV42</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>2.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1300+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon X1300 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2005</p></td><td  ><p>RV515</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>600</p></td><td  ><p>2.4</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6600+(128-bit)+*"><strong>GeForce 6600 (128-bit) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2004</p></td><td  ><p>NV43</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>300</p></td><td  ><p>2.4</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9700+*"><strong>Radeon 9700 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2002</p></td><td  ><p>R300</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>275</p></td><td  ><p>2.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9500+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon 9500 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2002</p></td><td  ><p>R300</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>275</p></td><td  ><p>2.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7300+GS+*"><strong>GeForce 7300 GS *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G72</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>550</p></td><td  ><p>2.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X600+XT+*"><strong>Radeon X600 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2004</p></td><td  ><p>RV380</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>2.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1550+*"><strong>Radeon X1550 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV516</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>2.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9600+XT+*"><strong>Radeon 9600 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2003</p></td><td  ><p>RV360</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>2.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5800+Ultra+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5800 Ultra *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV30</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>2.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5950+Ultra+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5950 Ultra *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV38</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>475</p></td><td  ><p>1.9</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5700+Ultra+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5700 Ultra *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV36</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>475</p></td><td  ><p>1.9</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5900+Ultra+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5900 Ultra *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV35</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>450</p></td><td  ><p>1.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5700+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5700 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV36</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>425</p></td><td  ><p>1.7</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X600+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon X600 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2004</p></td><td  ><p>RV370</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>1.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X600+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon X600 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2004</p></td><td  ><p>RV380</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>1.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X600+*"><strong>Radeon X600 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2004</p></td><td  ><p>RV370</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>1.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9600+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon 9600 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>RV350</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>1.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5900+XT+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5900 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV35</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>390</p></td><td  ><p>1.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5900+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5900 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV35</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>1.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5800+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5800 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV30</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>1.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5600+Ultra+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5600 Ultra *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV31</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>1.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9800+SE+(256-bit)+*"><strong>Radeon 9800 SE (256-bit) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>R350</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>380</p></td><td  ><p>1.5</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7300+LE+*"><strong>GeForce 7300 LE *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G72</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>350</p></td><td  ><p>1.4</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6200+TurboCache+*"><strong>GeForce 6200 TurboCache *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2004</p></td><td  ><p>NV44</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>350</p></td><td  ><p>1.4</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9600+SE+*"><strong>Radeon 9600 SE *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2003</p></td><td  ><p>RV350</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>1.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9600+*"><strong>Radeon 9600 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2003</p></td><td  ><p>RV350</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>1.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5600+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5600 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV31</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>1.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5200+Ultra+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5200 Ultra *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV34</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>1.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6600+LE+*"><strong>GeForce 6600 LE *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 1905</p></td><td  ><p>NV43</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>1.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X300+SE+*"><strong>Radeon X300 SE *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2004</p></td><td  ><p>RV370</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>300</p></td><td  ><p>1.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6200+*"><strong>GeForce 6200 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2004</p></td><td  ><p>NV43</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>300</p></td><td  ><p>1.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+4+Ti4800+*"><strong>GeForce 4 Ti4800 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV28</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>300</p></td><td  ><p>1.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+4+Ti4600+*"><strong>GeForce 4 Ti4600 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2002</p></td><td  ><p>NV25</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>300</p></td><td  ><p>1.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9500+*"><strong>Radeon 9500 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2002</p></td><td  ><p>R300</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>275</p></td><td  ><p>1.1</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+8500+*"><strong>Radeon 8500 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2001</p></td><td  ><p>R200</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>275</p></td><td  ><p>1.1</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5500+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5500 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2004</p></td><td  ><p>NV34B</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>270</p></td><td  ><p>1.1</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+4+Ti4800+SE+*"><strong>GeForce 4 Ti4800 SE *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV28</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>275</p></td><td  ><p>1.1</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+4+Ti4400+*"><strong>GeForce 4 Ti4400 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2002</p></td><td  ><p>NV25</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>275</p></td><td  ><p>1.1</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1050+(128-bit)+*"><strong>Radeon X1050 (128-bit) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2006</p></td><td  ><p>RV350</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9550+*"><strong>Radeon 9550 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2004</p></td><td  ><p>RV350</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9250+*"><strong>Radeon 9250 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2004</p></td><td  ><p>RV280</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>240</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9200+*"><strong>Radeon 9200 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2003</p></td><td  ><p>RV280</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9100+*"><strong>Radeon 9100 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2003</p></td><td  ><p>R200</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9000+*"><strong>Radeon 9000 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2002</p></td><td  ><p>RV250</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5700+LE+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5700 LE *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2004</p></td><td  ><p>NV36</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5200+(64-bit)+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5200 (64-bit) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV34</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5200+(128-bit)+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5200 (128-bit) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV34</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+4+Ti4200+*"><strong>GeForce 4 Ti4200 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2002</p></td><td  ><p>NV25</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+3+Ti500+*"><strong>GeForce 3 Ti500 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2001</p></td><td  ><p>NV20</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>240</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+2+Ultra+*"><strong>GeForce 2 Ultra *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2000</p></td><td  ><p>NV16</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+2+Ti+*"><strong>GeForce 2 Ti *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2001</p></td><td  ><p>NV15</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7200+GS+*"><strong>GeForce 7200 GS *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G72</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>450</p></td><td  ><p>0.9</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X300+*"><strong>Radeon X300 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2004</p></td><td  ><p>RV370</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>200</p></td><td  ><p>0.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9200+SE+*"><strong>Radeon 9200 SE *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>RV280</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>200</p></td><td  ><p>0.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+3+*"><strong>GeForce 3 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2001</p></td><td  ><p>NV20</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>200</p></td><td  ><p>0.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+2+GTS+*"><strong>GeForce 2 GTS *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2000</p></td><td  ><p>NV15</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>200</p></td><td  ><p>0.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+3+Ti200+*"><strong>GeForce 3 Ti200 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2001</p></td><td  ><p>NV20</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>175</p></td><td  ><p>0.7</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+7500+*"><strong>Radeon 7500 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2001</p></td><td  ><p>RV200</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>290</p></td><td  ><p>0.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+4+MX460+*"><strong>GeForce 4 MX460 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2002</p></td><td  ><p>NV17</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>300</p></td><td  ><p>0.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+4+MX440+*"><strong>GeForce 4 MX440 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2002</p></td><td  ><p>NV17</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>275</p></td><td  ><p>0.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Rage+Fury+MAXX+*"><strong>Rage Fury MAXX *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 1999</p></td><td  ><p>2x ATI Rage</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>125</p></td><td  ><p>0.5</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+4+MX420+*"><strong>GeForce 4 MX420 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2002</p></td><td  ><p>NV17</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>0.5</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+256+SDR+*"><strong>GeForce 256 SDR *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 1999</p></td><td  ><p>NV10</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>120</p></td><td  ><p>0.5</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+256+DDR+*"><strong>GeForce 256 DDR *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 1999</p></td><td  ><p>NV10</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>120</p></td><td  ><p>0.5</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+2+MX400+*"><strong>GeForce 2 MX400 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2001</p></td><td  ><p>NV11</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>200</p></td><td  ><p>0.4</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+2+MX200+*"><strong>GeForce 2 MX200 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2001</p></td><td  ><p>NV11</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>175</p></td><td  ><p>0.4</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Rage+128+Ultra+*"><strong>Rage 128 Ultra *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 1999</p></td><td  ><p>ATI Rage</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>130</p></td><td  ><p>0.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Rage+128+Pro+*"><strong>Rage 128 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 1999</p></td><td  ><p>ATI Rage</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>125</p></td><td  ><p>0.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+SDR+*"><strong>Radeon SDR *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2000</p></td><td  ><p>R100</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>166</p></td><td  ><p>0.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+LE+*"><strong>Radeon LE *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2001</p></td><td  ><p>R100</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>150</p></td><td  ><p>0.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+DDR+*"><strong>Radeon DDR *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2000</p></td><td  ><p>R100</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>166</p></td><td  ><p>0.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+7200+SDR+*"><strong>Radeon 7200 SDR *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2000</p></td><td  ><p>R100</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>166</p></td><td  ><p>0.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+7200+DDR+*"><strong>Radeon 7200 DDR *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2000</p></td><td  ><p>R100</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>166</p></td><td  ><p>0.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Riva+TNT2+Ultra+*"><strong>Nvidia Riva TNT2 Ultra *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 1999</p></td><td  ><p>NV5</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>150</p></td><td  ><p>0.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Riva+TNT2+Pro+*"><strong>Nvidia Riva TNT2 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 1999</p></td><td  ><p>NV5</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>143</p></td><td  ><p>0.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Riva+TNT2+*"><strong>Nvidia Riva TNT2 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 1999</p></td><td  ><p>NV5</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>125</p></td><td  ><p>0.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Rage+128+GL+*"><strong>Rage 128 GL *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 1998</p></td><td  ><p>ATI Rage</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>103</p></td><td  ><p>0.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+7000+*"><strong>Radeon 7000 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2001</p></td><td  ><p>RV100</p></td><td  ><p>1</p></td><td  ><p>183</p></td><td  ><p>0.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Riva+TNT+*"><strong>Nvidia Riva TNT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 1998</p></td><td  ><p>NV4</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>90</p></td><td  ><p>0.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Riva+128+*"><strong>Nvidia Riva 128 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 1997</p></td><td  ><p>NV3</p></td><td  ><p>1</p></td><td  ><p>100</p></td><td  ><p>0.1</p></td><td  ></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p><em>* - Denotes performance measured in "GOps" — gigaoperations per second — as opposed to GFLOPS. Older GPU architectures without unified shader support aren't directly comparable with newer architectures.</em></p><h2 id="finding-discounts-on-the-best-graphics-cards">Finding Discounts on the Best Graphics Cards</h2><p>With all the GPU shortages these days, you're unlikely to see huge sales on a graphics card, but you may find some savings by checking out the latest <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/coupons/newegg.com">Newegg promo codes</a>, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/coupons/bestbuy.com">Best Buy promo codes</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/coupons/microcenter.com">Micro Center coupon codes</a>.</p><p>For even more information, check out our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-buying-guide,5844.html"><strong>Graphics Card Buyer's Guide</strong></a>.</p><p><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html"><strong>Best Graphics Cards for Gaming</strong></a></p><p><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/graphics-card-power-consumption-tested"><strong>Graphics Card Power Consumption Tested</strong></a></p><p><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-to-stress-test-graphics-cards,5449.html"><strong>How to Stress-Test Graphics Cards (Like We Do)</strong></a></p><p><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html"><strong>CPU Benchmarks</strong></a></p><p><em>Want to comment on this story? </em><a href="https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/gpu-performance-hierarchy-2019-video-cards-ranked.3454941/"><em>Let us know what you think in the Tom's Hardware Forums</em></a><em>.</em></p><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/SzkW6ASo.html" id="SzkW6ASo" title="Buy the Right Graphics Card" width="1920" height="1080" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Grand Theft Auto V on PC is finally getting ray tracing and some graphics options ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/pc-gaming/grand-theft-auto-v-on-pc-is-finally-getting-ray-tracing-and-some-graphics-options</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ GTA V on PC gets a long-awaited next-gen console parity update adding RT and other missing effects. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">x7YnZ2DjefkVhn93fyEeLe</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z6WPuzivxpHysRZuqkhj2j-1280-80.png" type="image/png" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2025 19:49:04 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Wed, 09 Apr 2025 13:17:32 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[PC Gaming]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Video Games]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Christopher Harper ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qS2hbWnXwNUSmgyAHBQqKB.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Christopher Harper has been a successful freelance tech writer specializing in PC hardware and gaming since 2015, and ghostwrote&amp;nbsp;for various B2B clients in High School before that. Outside of work, Christopher is best known to friends and rivals as an active competitive player in various eSports (particularly fighting games and arena shooters) and a purveyor of music ranging from Jimi Hendrix to Killer Mike to the&amp;nbsp;Sonic Adventure 2&amp;nbsp;soundtrack.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/png" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z6WPuzivxpHysRZuqkhj2j-1280-80.png">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Rockstar Games]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                        <media:description><![CDATA[Grand Theft Auto V&#039;s PC port finally gets long-awaited ray traced graphical effects, bringing it up to and beyond par with the PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X versions.]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Grand Theft Auto V&#039;s PC port finally gets long-awaited ray traced graphical effects, bring it up to and beyond par with the PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X versions.]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Grand Theft Auto V&#039;s PC port finally gets long-awaited ray traced graphical effects, bring it up to and beyond par with the PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X versions.]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z6WPuzivxpHysRZuqkhj2j-1280-80.png" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Earlier this morning, Rockstar Games <a href="https://www.rockstargames.com/newswire/article/akk98a4o755825/free-upgrade-for-grand-theft-auto-v-on-pc-coming-march-4">announced in a blog post</a> that the PC version of Grand Theft Auto V, long left languishing without the addition of ray-traced shadows and reflections available on PS5/XSX, would be receiving a free update to add those graphical features among several other exclusive tweaks to the PC version of <em>Grand Theft Auto V</em> . This free update is being released as a new executable, so the old version of the game, which is far easier to run, will still be available to gamers whose PCs can't meet the new specification requirements.</p><p>Besides ray-traced reflections and shadows being added from the next-gen console versions of <em>GTA V</em>, other ray-traced features coming exclusively to PC include RTAO (ambient occlusion) and RTGI (global illumination), bringing the picture far more in line with other ray-traced games instead of rasterized titles with a few RT effects. DirectStorage support for improved SSD performance has also been added alongside Dolby Atmos support.</p><p>Finally, a suite of display options and image enhancement technologies, including AMD FSR 3 and Nvidia DLSS 3 with Frame Generation (and "higher" framerates in general, though it hasn't been specified if they will be unlocked) have been added. Enhanced support for <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gaming-monitors,4533.html" target="_blank">"higher resolutions" and "higher aspect ratios"</a> are also mentioned, which would seem to indicate Ultrawide support and some degree of high-DPI scaling for the HUD.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/87xZF6oaUj2SSzygYJaU4P.png" alt="Minimum and Recommended Specs for the Grand Theft Auto V PC update." /><figcaption>Minimum and Recommended Specs for the Grand Theft Auto V PC update, now leveraging a new executable. The old executable with the original system requirements will still be present, but segregate online play.<small role="credit">Rockstar Games</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HtL9nGmeTc57q5smhettjD.png" alt="Screenshot of the newly updated PC port of Grand Theft Auto V, now flaunting ray traced effects." /><figcaption>Screenshot of the newly updated PC port of Grand Theft Auto V, now flaunting ray traced effects.<small role="credit">Rockstar Games</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Overall, the new <em>Grand Theft Auto V </em>PC requirements with RT enabled still seem pretty reasonable, considering how great the game already looked before all these RT effects were added. Unfortunately, Rockstar doesn't tell us what the resolution and FPS targets for the "Minimum" and "Recommended" specs are, and we do anticipate those hoping to make the most of high-res, ultrawide, or high-refresh displays will want to invest in yet <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html" target="_blank">higher-end gaming CPUs</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html" target="_blank">RT-capable gaming GPUs</a>.</p><p>Anyway, that's all of the <em>technical</em> information. A bevy of in-game bonuses are also being added with this version of the game, which we recommend perusing in the <a href="https://www.rockstargames.com/newswire/article/akk98a4o755825/free-upgrade-for-grand-theft-auto-v-on-pc-coming-march-4" target="_blank">official blog post</a> or allowing to surprise you when the update drops on March 4. There's even DualSense adaptive trigger support! The only real downside of this update seems to be the lack of support for multiplayer between the old <em>GTA V</em> executable and the new one, which will somewhat segregate low-spec players from high-spec players and vice versa— otherwise, this is a clear win and arguably overdue update for <em>GTA</em> fans on PC. (At least, until the long wait for <em>GTA 6</em>!)</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Nvidia DLSS4, MFG, and full ray tracing tested on RTX 5090 and RTX 5080 ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-dlss4-mfg-and-full-ray-tracing-tested-on-rtx-5090-and-rtx-5080</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ The time crunch for the launch of the RTX 5090 and 5080 cards meant we weren't able to fully investigate MFG, DLSS4, and full RT the way we'd like. We'll be updating those sections of the reviews, but here's the deeper dive into how the new technologies impact the gaming experience. It's not all sunshine and roses and doubled performance. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">t5XGae2G7aJKmjVupukdCA</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eGv2puZAwLdb9b5iiB7Hhi-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 05 Feb 2025 17:27:38 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:43:59 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jarred Walton ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8uFgSGcCzKdFTTQdqonCPi.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jarred&#039;s love of computers dates back to the dark ages, when his dad brought home a DOS 2.3 PC and he left his C-64 behind. He eventually built his first custom PC in 1990 with a 286 12MHz, only to discover it was already woefully outdated when Wing Commander released a few months later. He holds a BS in Computer Science from Brigham Young University and has been working as a tech journalist since 2004, writing for AnandTech, Maximum PC, and PC Gamer. From the first S3 Virge &#039;3D decelerators&#039; to today&#039;s GPUs, Jarred keeps up with all the latest graphics trends and is the one to ask about game performance.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eGv2puZAwLdb9b5iiB7Hhi-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Tom&#039;s Hardware]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[DLSS4 and MFG meet full RT]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[DLSS4 and MFG meet full RT]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[DLSS4 and MFG meet full RT]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eGv2puZAwLdb9b5iiB7Hhi-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Nvidia&apos;s new <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-5090-review">GeForce RTX 5090</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-5080-review">GeForce RTX 5080</a> have arrived, and coupled with a new testbed and a revised test suite, not to mention new drivers and a host of other changes, our initial benchmarks had to gloss over a few areas. One of the biggest selling points for the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-blackwell-rtx-50-series-gpus-everything-we-know">Blackwell RTX 50-series GPUs</a> — according to Nvidia, at least — is DLSS4 with Multi Frame Generation (MFG), an AI-based technology that offers further "performance" improvements over DLSS3 and framegen. But there are other changes as well.<br><br>As we discussed prior to the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/rtx-50-series-paper-launch-saw-rtx-5090-rtx-5080-flew-off-the-shelves-micro-center-best-buy-and-newegg-are-all-out-of-stock">Blackwell hardware paper launch</a>, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-neural-rendering-deep-dive-full-details-on-dlss-4-reflex-2-mega-geometry-and-more">DLSS4 and neural rendering technologies</a> make direct comparisons between the new RTX 50-series GPUs and their 40-series predecessors a bit more complex. And by "complex" we mean you can&apos;t just take any of the published numbers at face value. MFG in particular requires a far more nuanced approach.<br><br>As pointed out in our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-5090-review/6">RTX 5090 testing in Cyberpunk 2077</a>, there&apos;s far more going on than a simple "bigger number is better" approach can convey. The easiest way to show this is to think about what some theoretical performance numbers might mean.<br><br>Take a game running at 50 FPS baseline, without frame generation. That&apos;s a decent result but not totally smooth. Now turn on a perfectly executed framegen algorithm and say it gets 100 FPS. That&apos;s twice as many "frames" delivered to your monitor each second, but user input sampling happens at the same 50 FPS as before. It <em>looks</em> smoother but it doesn&apos;t actually feel much different. Double that again with MFG4X mode and it&apos;s 200 FPS, still with the same 50 input samples per second.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="GafvqpR2VfGkN4N2S86BuZ" name="Nvidia-Session-1-Neural-Rendering-36.jpg" alt="Nvidia Neural Rendering deep dive" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GafvqpR2VfGkN4N2S86BuZ.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Nvidia)</span></figcaption></figure><p>As with the original framegen, it&apos;s more about smoothing out the visuals than providing a true boost to performance. And on some level, games can and do <em>feel</em> better with a big enough increase in the number of frames being sent to your display. Visual smoothness and "feel" are linked in our brains (or at least, they are in my brain), so a game spitting out 100 frames in a second but sampling just 25 times per second can still feel better than the same game running at 30 FPS with 30 input samples per second. Usually, anyway — it varies by game and other factors still play a role.<br><br>How much better framegen is compared to non-framegen traditional rendering is a much harder question to answer. And not only does it vary by game, but it also varies by individual. One person might find framegen delivers a totally acceptable experience, while another might hate that exact same experience.<br><br>Personally, what I find is that single frame generation — meaning, what we had with DLSS3 and FSR3 — needs to boost the "FPS" by at least 50% to have a decent chance at feeling better. That would mean as an example taking 40 FPS native and turning it into 60 FPS or more with framegen. And there are also limits to how far you need to go. Boosting 100 FPS to 150 FPS via framegen doesn&apos;t represent a true 50% improvement in performance, but the latter gets beyond a 144Hz display refresh rate and is so fast that, even though the input sampling rate is lower (75 compared to 100 samples per second), it can still look and feel "better" to some people.<br><br>But what if the base framerate is 100 FPS and framegen only increases that to 130 FPS? That&apos;s something we&apos;ve seen in certain cases. Or what if it&apos;s a change from 50 FPS to 65 FPS? The latter in particular can feel worse, as the input sampling rate drops from 50 down to just 32.5, 35% slower, and that can be quite sluggish as far as responsiveness goes.<br><br>Then we have to add in MFG now, interpolating multiple frames between two rendered frames. With a perfect algorithm, MFG4X can double the frames to monitor rate compared to framegen (now MFG2X on 50-series GPUs), or quadruple the native framerate. Does it feel twice or four times as fast? No. Not even close. It can still feel better — again, that&apos;s subjective and varies by game and user — but how much becomes a far more difficult proposition to quantify.</p><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">Test Equipment</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text"><strong>TOM&apos;S HARDWARE AMD ZEN 5 PC</strong></p><p class="fancy-box__body-text"><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=ryzen+7+9800x3d">AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813162071">ASRock Taichi X670E</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DGRFBN96">G.Skill TridentZ5 Neo 2x16GB DDR5-6000 CL28</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16820156334">Crucial T700 4TB</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08BV2RHZW">Cooler Master ML280 Mirror</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16817139320">Corsair HX1500i</a></p><p class="fancy-box__body-text"><strong>GRAPHICS CARDS</strong><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+5090&crid=36Q0JKUMJWLBE">Nvidia GeForce RTX 5090</a> (Founders Edition)<br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+5080&crid=36Q0JKUMJWLBE">Nvidia GeForce RTX 5080</a> (Founders Edition)<br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+4090&crid=36Q0JKUMJWLBE">Nvidia GeForce RTX 4090</a> (Founders Edition)<br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+4080+Super&crid=36Q0JKUMJWLBE">Nvidia GeForce RTX 4080 Super</a> (Founders Edition)<br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+7900+XTX&crid=36Q0JKUMJWLBE">AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX</a> (reference card)</p></div></div><p>That&apos;s the preamble to a far more fuzzy and indistinct topic than raw performance. It&apos;s why we focus primarily on native non-upscaled, non-framegen performance for our reviews. It&apos;s one thing to say that 50 FPS is faster than 40 FPS when using traditional rendering. It&apos;s quite a different story if we&apos;re talking about 50 FPS with framegen versus 40 FPS without, or 80 FPS with MFG versus 40 FPS native. In both of those scenarios, I would almost certainly prefer the non-framegen experience.<br><br>For this deeper dive into MFG and DLSS4, and regular framegen as well, I&apos;ve picked five of the most demanding ray tracing games currently available, three of which now have native support for Nvidia&apos;s DLSS4 and MFG. All of the games also feature higher levels of ray tracing, with four of the games supporting full ray tracing (aka "path tracing"). This should in theory provide some of the best-case scenarios for the RTX 5090 and RTX 5080 to strut their stuff.<br><br>The test hardware is the same as we used before, with a Ryzen 7 9800X3D processor and all the bells and whistles. We have 32GB of low latency DDR5-6000 memory, a 4TB PCIe 5.0 SSD, a high-end motherboard, and a powerful 1500W PSU. Full specs are in the boxout.<br><br>Let&apos;s get to the test results, in alphabetical order. We have four charts for each game: 4K ultra, 4K ultra plus framegen, and then mostly for reference we have 1440p and 1080p ultra as well. And "ultra" means various things here, but you&apos;ll get that from the charts. Note that we are <em>not</em> running strictly apples to apples comparisons here, as the AMD GPU doesn&apos;t support Nvidia&apos;s DLSS algorithm, nor does it support Ray Reconstruction. It&apos;s present mostly as a point of reference, and the image quality of FSR3 is <a href="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4iD6zJoDjPCkTyatibrvt7.jpg" target="_blank">provably</a> <a href="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4KLHnEt7Xbxs72hv4etoU7.jpg" target="_blank">inferior</a>. The 40-series GPUs also don&apos;t support MFG but should otherwise be similar in capabilities and image quality to the 50-series GPUs.</p><h2 id="alan-wake-2-dlss4-and-mfg">Alan Wake 2: DLSS4 and MFG</h2><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="dwK783EdheGznWZLtcQrEH" name="Alan Wake 2.jpg" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG testing." src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dwK783EdheGznWZLtcQrEH.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Remedy)</span></figcaption></figure><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DkPhrsJtmxTjexdSDRYhZ5.png" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG performance testing." /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iYEp8behDmV4fhhMf8pLf5.png" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG performance testing." /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QcRyVPJnksPTzM86cWzDU5.png" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG performance testing." /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UgUf8KBrJZ5xxF9guemcN5.png" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG performance testing." /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Alan Wake 2 kicks things off with a brutally punishing full RT mode that brings lesser GPUs crashing to their knees. The 4080 Super, even with DLSS Quality mode upscaling — and we&apos;re using the new Transformers mode here — only manages 26 FPS. The "new and improved" RTX 5080 bumps that all the way up to... 29 FPS. Yup, it&apos;s not much faster in terms of raw performance potential. And AMD&apos;s RX 7900 XTX stutters along at just 12.5 FPS.<br><br>The 4090 manages a more respectable 37 FPS, which is playable if not amazingly smooth. RTX 5090 kicks that up to 48 FPS, a significantly better overall experience. They&apos;re both fast enough at base performance that frame generation could actually prove useful. So what does framegen and MFG do to the standings?<br><br>First, let&apos;s note that Alan Wake 2 only supports FSR2, so AMD doesn&apos;t get any framegen help. <Sigh> This is one of the continually frustrating things with upscaling and frame generation: There are a lot of games that primarily support only one vendor solution. Even those that do support AMD FSR, Intel XeSS, and Nvidia DLSS don&apos;t always treat them equally, as seen here. FSR3.1 should be basically drop-in compatible with FSR2, at least for upscaling, and it also offers framegen as a potential help. It won&apos;t look as good as DLSS, but just about anything is better than 12.5 FPS at 4K on AMD&apos;s fastest GPU.<br><br>Looking to Nvidia&apos;s 40-series parts, the RTX 4080 Super gets a bump to 49 FPS, an 86% improvement over the baseline FPS. That means that, even though it does have a slightly lower input sampling rate of 24.4 instead of 26.2, overall it does feel <em>better</em> in my opinion. It also helps that Alan Wake 2 tends to be a more methodical game so having a super responsive experience isn&apos;t required. The 4090 sees a similar bump of 85% to 68 FPS, which again is a better overall experience in my opinion.<br><br>What about the RTX 50-series GPUs? The 5080 gets an 87% improvement with MFG2X, about the same as the 40-series. But then it also has options for MFG3X that&apos;s 2.71X faster than the baseline rendering, and MFG4X that&apos;s 3.49X faster than baseline. Each progressively higher level of frame generation does increase latency slightly, but the scaling is otherwise nearly linear.<br><br>The 5090 sees similar gains: 1.84X with MFG2X, 2.66X for MFG3X, and 3.44X using MFG4X. Those are slightly lower in all three cases than the 5080, so perhaps other factors like CPU speed are slightly limiting performance, but each additional frame generated by MFG provides about an 80% boost to the frames to monitor rate.<br><br>But here&apos;s the important bit: MFG4X doesn&apos;t feel like it&apos;s running anywhere near twice as fast as MFG2X. It looks smoother, and feels a bit better subjectively, but if you were to hide the settings and ask me what the game feels like? I&apos;d guess somewhere in the 65~80 FPS range. That&apos;s better than the 42 samples per second on the input, but far lower than the 166 "FPS" results would suggest. MFG2X feels like it&apos;s running at perhaps 55~65 FPS, but definitely not as responsive as what you&apos;d get from native rendering at 89 FPS.<br><br>And again, these numbers are all very fuzzy. We can measure how many frames get sent to the monitor, and use that to calculate how many input samples are taken, but the actual feel lands somewhere in between. Where exactly it lands? That&apos;s far more subjective and will depend on the game and user. Alan Wake 2 also happens to be the best-case scenario for framegen and MFG in my experience, as it&apos;s far slower paced. The main characters have two speeds: a meandering saunter and a slightly faster brisk walk. It&apos;s not a fast-paced game, in other words.</p><h2 id="black-myth-wukong-dlss3-and-framegen">Black Myth: Wukong: DLSS3 and Framegen</h2><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="SpqVgZiosUhdJM2x4atvVH" name="Black Myth Wukong.jpg" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG testing." src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SpqVgZiosUhdJM2x4atvVH.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Game Science)</span></figcaption></figure><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/srzJyoyo3NJb8z9x5Bcpu5.png" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG performance testing." /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8uXAeJr6hAh7eLA2c8cpz5.png" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG performance testing." /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xouFSgWLqTBqNctT6kcyp5.png" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG performance testing." /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gdzsYRJhajdgmJiBtiTFk5.png" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG performance testing." /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Next up is Black Myth: Wukong, also running full RT effects but this time without DLSS4 or ray reconstruction on Nvidia GPUs. That means no MFG, for now — though we suspect an upgrade and patch are in the works, or at least an Nvidia App override. (There&apos;s no option to override Black Myth: Wukong settings right now.)<br><br>The baseline performance at 4K with quality mode upscaling is again quite terrible on AMD&apos;s 7900 XTX, at just 9.2 FPS. The 4080 Super is already almost four times as fast, but the 5080 is only 13% faster than its predecessor. The 4090 sits at 48 FPS, and the 5090 beats it by 31% at 62 FPS.<br><br>This time, we have FSR3 support for framegen and that gives AMD a 92% improvement to the frames to monitor rate — which at just under 18 FPS is still far from playable (and still feels like 9 FPS). The 4080 Super gets a 62% boost via DLSS3 framegen, and there&apos;s a similar improvement for other RTX cards. The 5080 gets a 65% improvement, 4090 nets a 62% increase, and the 5090 improves by 67%.<br><br>This time, the benefits of frame generation are less pronounced. DLSS3 relies on fixed function hardware and doesn&apos;t tend to scale as well as the new DLSS4 algorithms, so the 4090 as an example goes from a playable 40 FPS with input sampling also happening 40 times per second, up to 66 FPS with framegen but with input sampling dropping to 33 times per second. It looks smoother but feels less responsive, and the same goes for the 5080 and 4080 Super.<br><br>The 5090 benefits by simply being more powerful. Yes, input sampling sees a similar drop, from 62 samples per second without framegen down to 52 samples with framegen. Both results are high enough that, at least for me, it feels "smooth enough" that I&apos;m not bothered by the experience. But I do look forward to seeing MFG and DLSS4 support, as that should hopefully provide a similar 80~85 percent improvement on all the 40-series and 50-series GPUs, with MFG4X potentially providing even better frame smoothing.</p><h2 id="cyberpunk-2077-dlss4-and-mfg">Cyberpunk 2077: DLSS4 and MFG</h2><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="bX7FebSEtVGSzHFmFy9DiH" name="Cyberpunk 2077 Phantom Liberty.jpg" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG testing." src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bX7FebSEtVGSzHFmFy9DiH.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: CD Projekt Red)</span></figcaption></figure><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FFs3djJs68MaSFzQG8hmG6.png" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG performance testing." /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bXc7LTkrqLoab7n4NWMVN6.png" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG performance testing." /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QZzVu9gG2tyBGHvgZ6djB6.png" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG performance testing." /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vyGnTcYHkYVatEfDmfak66.png" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG performance testing." /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Cyberpunk 2077 was the first game to get official native DLSS4 support. It also lets you choose between the old DLSS CNN models and the newer DLSS Transformer models for upscaling, if you&apos;re okay with sacrificing quality to get more of a performance boost. For these tests, however, I stuck to using DLSS Transformers in all cases.<br><br>The RT-Overdrive preset uses "path tracing" (full RT) and again destroys all but the fastest Nvidia GPUs at 4K. Ray Reconstruction may or may not provide much of a performance benefit, but it does look better than the default path tracing mode, so we used that for all the Nvidia GPUs — so again, not apples to apples.<br><br>AMD&apos;s 7900 XTX chokes at 4K with quality mode upscaling at just 16 FPS. The 4080 Super doubles that with 32 FPS, and the 5080 again shows only a minor 12% improvement over its direct predecessor. The 4090 is playable at 43 FPS, while the 5090 delivers 37% higher performance at 59 FPS.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3840px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="4iD6zJoDjPCkTyatibrvt7" name="CP77-AMD-7900-XTX-framegen-(2).jpg" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG performance testing." src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4iD6zJoDjPCkTyatibrvt7.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="3840" height="2160" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4iD6zJoDjPCkTyatibrvt7.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="caption-text">AMD 7900 XTX running FSR3.1 framegen, with serious artifacts visible. </span><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>With frame generation, AMD gets a nearly perfect 94% improvement to 31 FPS, though it&apos;s still not particularly playable. You can also see the very noticeable artifacts caused by FSR3 framegen in the above image. The 4080 Super and 4090 see an 85% and 90% increase in frames to monitor rates, nearly matching AMD&apos;s benefit — and this is yet again why DLSS4 feels much better now than DLSS3.<br><br>And then there&apos;s the 50-series parts. The 5080 gets a 1.83X boost with MFG2X, 2.64X with 3X, and 3.38X with MFG4X. The 5090 sees improvements of 1.82X, 2.61X, and 3.30X. Input latency does increase slightly at each additional level of MFG, but it&apos;s not <em>terrible</em>: 40ms without MFG on the 5090, 47ms with 2X, 50 with 3X, and 53 with 4X. It&apos;s also not <em>better</em>. The 5080 went from 55ms latency, increasing to 67ms with MFG2X, 70 with 3X, and 74ms with 4X.<br><br>Does MFG make the 5080 as an example feel faster than an RTX 4090? The frames to monitor rates suggest it&apos;s much faster — up to 122 "FPS" compared to only 82 "FPS." But the input sampling rate of 30.5 samples per second versus 40.8 samples per second makes things far less clear. Subjectively, I&apos;d say it felt more like equal, at best, rather than a 50% advantage for the RTX 5080. I suspect a lot of gamers would end up preferring the 4090 2X framegen experience over the 5080 with MFG4X.</p><h2 id="hogwarts-legacy-dlss4-and-mfg">Hogwarts Legacy: DLSS4 and MFG</h2><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="Z6Ue2qzpyzaAEWEghbu8xH" name="Hogwarts Legacy.jpg" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG testing." src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z6Ue2qzpyzaAEWEghbu8xH.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Warner Bros. Games)</span></figcaption></figure><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Q9K4YwG7GMLZ59PkWo6bd6.png" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG performance testing." /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PnCFsMUyGo5q7TcFGsjGj6.png" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG performance testing." /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GGqiroCaqzqgpnBKNMwdY6.png" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG performance testing." /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iGroA7cnqRkeVDHRNWVoT6.png" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG performance testing." /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Hogwarts Legacy also has a public update that enables DLSS4 with ray reconstruction and MFG support. If you thought it would be "more of the same," relative to the above two MFG examples, it&apos;s not. And the problems are systemic for the game engine, as far as I can tell. Simply put: Maxing out the ray tracing options right now makes Hogwarts Legacy a worse experience. There&apos;s a lot of microstuttering, and the overall performance gets massively reduced compared to running the game without RT.<br><br>The issue seems to be inherent to virtually all Unreal Engine 4 games with lots of ray tracing. It just doesn&apos;t handle RT effects well, no matter the hardware. Hogwarts Legacy becomes CPU limited on the 9800X3D to around 60 FPS, give or take — slightly higher on the 7900 XTX than on the fastest Nvidia GPUs. And again, it&apos;s not apples to apples since we&apos;re running DLSS4 vs FSR2 — yes, FSR2 again, so no framegen for non-Nvidia GPUs.<br><br>On the one hand, being so CPU limited means we should see very good scaling from framegen and MFG for the Nvidia GPUs. The 4080 Super gets an 80% boost from framegen and the 4090 sees a similar 81% improvement. MFG2X yields an 82% increase on the 5080, and a "better than perfect" 106% boost on the 5090. Still, all the microstuttering remains a perceptible artifact, even after frame generation.<br><br>That goes for higher levels of MFG as well. The 5080 runs 2.61X faster with MFG3X and 3.23X faster with MFG4X. It does look smoother, and feels a bit better, but the irregular frametimes can still be felt. The routine hitching makes overall performance feel closer to the listed 1% low FPS rather than the average FPS.<br><br>The 5090 meanwhile continues to see exceptional scaling for whatever reason. It&apos;s 3.05X faster with MFG3X and 4.01X faster using MFG4X. It probably has something to do with the poorly running RT plus ray reconstruction (turning off ray reconstruction only boosts performance by around 10%), but framegen really shouldn&apos;t provide more than a 100% improvement at each level. Fundamentally, though, the inconsistent base performance creates a problem.<br><br>The 5090 starts with an average of 55 FPS but 1% lows of just 33 FPS. That&apos;s a pretty big disparity that&apos;s very noticeable when playing the game. You see similar average and minimum FPS results for all the RTX cards at 1440p and 1080p. MFG attempts to smooth things out, but the uneven pacing seems to throw the algorithm off, so that a single frametime spike in the base rendering still shows up as a spike with MFG enabled.<br><br>Turn off ray tracing completely and baseline performance basically doubles at 4K, with significantly higher performance at 1440p and 1080p. That makes framegen and MFG less important to begin with, and certainly the benefits of MFG4X pulling over 300 FPS feel exaggerated. The 5080 as an example manages 115 FPS average, 62 FPS on the 1% lows, and an input latency of 24ms at 4K with DLSS Quality Transformers and no MFG. Turn on MFG4X and it gets 296 "FPS" with 1% lows of 113 FPS, and an input latency of 34ms — which means a base rendering speed of 74 FPS. The net result, again, is that even if MFG4X perhaps looks smoother, the overall experience isn&apos;t noticeably improved.</p><h2 id="indiana-jones-and-the-great-circle-dlss3-and-framegen">Indiana Jones and the Great Circle: DLSS3 and Framegen</h2><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="yqKvDvAjGRRsrxDRVgr98J" name="Indiana Jones and the Great Circle.jpg" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG testing." src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yqKvDvAjGRRsrxDRVgr98J.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Bethesda)</span></figcaption></figure><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cWvGMHG4TYVbiQeCqD9Gz6.png" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG performance testing." /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/G6B5m4q4RoqgFguTCiQF67.png" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG performance testing." /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XQYCNmf89XoU3jSyj54Su6.png" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG performance testing." /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Re92zZP3FCdwqb9Y8KDSp6.png" alt="Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG performance testing." /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Indiana Jones and the Great Circle is our final test for DLSS upscaling and framegen. It&apos;s a Vulkan Ray Tracing game, using Nvidia RT extensions that apparently only fully work on RTX cards if you want to enable the full RT mode — which we did. That means no AMD card this time.<br><br>And it&apos;s possible to use the Nvidia App to force the use of DLSS Transformers, but you can&apos;t force DLSS4 frame generation right now. That&apos;s not supported for this game. (Even if you could, as you can in about 75 other games, it&apos;s a pain as far as testing goes: Launch Nvidia App, set overrides, start and test the game, then exit the game and repeat the process. It&apos;s better if you&apos;re not trying to run benchmarks, of course.)<br><br>The baseline at 4K ultra with full RT using the maximum "very high" setting ends up being quite good for all four of the GPUs we tested. The 4080 Super gets 60 FPS, 69 FPS for the 5080, 81 FPS on the 4090, and 102 FPS on the 5090. That should provide for some useful improvements with framegen... except this ends up being a terrible result with DLSS3 framegen.<br><br>The 5090 "improves" to just 138 FPS, a 36% increase in the frames to monitor rate, but the base rendering rate drops to just 69 FPS. Going from a native 102 input samples per second to a framegen 69 samples per second is <em>not</em> an improved experience. Unfortunately, FrameView didn&apos;t give us an input latency result for Indiana Jones — probably for the best (from Nvidia&apos;s perspective) as it would certainly be substantially worse with framegen enabled. The RTX 4090 gets a 37% increase from framegen as well, going from 81 to 110 FPS, but with the base rendering rate dropping to 55 FPS.<br><br>As for the RTX 5080 and 4080 Super, with the current public build and without forcing DLSS4 through the Nvidia App, they both run out of VRAM and effectively fail to work at 4K with quality upscaling and framegen. (I didn&apos;t check if DLSS Transformers helped, but I suspect not.) The 5080 just locked up the game completely and we had to kill the process manually, while the 4080 Super dropped to a slideshow-like 18 FPS.<br><br>That&apos;s another "thanks but no thanks" to frame generation with the current public release of the game, if you&apos;re keeping track.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="DmKUAVF76YJUKkt6CocP7c" name="Nvidia-Session-1-Neural-Rendering-39.jpg" alt="Nvidia Neural Rendering deep dive" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DmKUAVF76YJUKkt6CocP7c.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="caption-text">Nvidia sample of DLSS performance improvements over time. </span><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Nvidia)</span></figcaption></figure><h2 id="nvidia-dlss4-and-mfg-closing-thoughts">Nvidia DLSS4 and MFG: Closing Thoughts</h2><p>After testing five of the heaviest games available right now, and also poking around at one game without using ray tracing, the net takeaway for DLSS4 MFG hasn&apos;t radically changed compared to DLSS3 framegen. That doesn&apos;t mean DLSS4 in general isn&apos;t important, but the MFG marketing for the 50-series wildly overstates the performance and end-user experience.<br><br>DLSS4 Transformers rendering looks better, often correcting some of the most egregious rendering errors caused by upscaling. It&apos;s still not perfect but the artifacts are mostly things that can be ignored. With an RTX 40-series or 50-series GPU and a game that supports DLSS Transformers either natively or via Nvidia App overrides, it&apos;s a welcome addition. Performance is slightly slower but quality is improved, so that potentially you could use DLSS Transformers with Balanced (3X) upscaling to deliver comparable visuals and higher performance than DLSS CNN with Quality (2.25X) upscaling.<br><br>Ray Reconstruction sees similar improvements from the use of Transformers instead of a CNN network, but here the number of games that support DLSS 3.5 Ray Reconstruction is so limited as to make this a far less important feature. You can check the <a href="https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/nvidia-rtx-games-engines-apps/" target="_blank">full Nvidia list of DLSS games</a>, but here&apos;s the summary for DLSS 3.5 RR showing just five games.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1612px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:31.89%;"><img id="y8Q7eeyZDBxkSgccHYzeBD" name="1738771195.jpg" alt="Nvidia list of games with Ray Reconstruction (Feb 2025)" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/y8Q7eeyZDBxkSgccHYzeBD.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1612" height="514" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Nvidia)</span></figcaption></figure><p>As for MFG, it&apos;s not a <em>bad</em> option to have, but it&apos;s no universal panacea, certainly not in the current implementation. Of the games we tested that support the feature, the experience ranged from being akin to lipstick on a pig (Hogwarts Legacy, with or without ray tracing) to decent (Cyberpunk 2077) to pretty good (Alan Wake 2). What it mostly comes down to is the speed of the gameplay and the base level of performance.<br><br>MFG4X certainly smooths out the frame pacing to your monitor. The best use case seems to be streaming at 120 FPS, where you could potentially have a game that only runs at 30~45 FPS get a boost to 120 for viewers. (Not that many streamers even use that mode.) It would still feel closer to the base framerate, but for those watching it would look smoother and more fluid. But it can&apos;t work miracles so if you have a game with inconsistent frame pacing (looking at you again, Hogwarts Legacy), even after MFG smoothing it will still feel inconsistent — a bit less so, but definitely still perceptible.<br><br>If on the other hand you have a game that already delivers a consistent experience, in terms of frame pacing, MFG and framegen tend to work better. And at the same time, they become less important to have. In other words, it&apos;s about taking a good experience and making it slightly better, rather than taking a mediocre or poor experience and making it good.<br><br>As Nvidia discussed in its presentation on Neural Rendering, there are three competing factors with rendering graphics: performance, latency, and image quality. (It called these smoothness, responsiveness, and image quality.) Pushing all three to higher levels is difficult and can require lots of expensive PC hardware.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ea2pckHdS9sCoy5HywKZNX.jpg" alt="Nvidia Neural Rendering deep dive" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Enwu4xogTC8wiXV7fYaGTX.jpg" alt="Nvidia Neural Rendering deep dive" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/a9TEC2mxbko3oC6L3BEzXX.jpg" alt="Nvidia Neural Rendering deep dive" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/b83FmY6dAHJobtbzFmQNkX.jpg" alt="Nvidia Neural Rendering deep dive" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Framegen and MFG are an alternative take to traditional rendering that compromises on latency in order to boost performance, with a hopefully only slight loss in image fidelity. But you can&apos;t just measure frames to monitor and latency to conclude whether something is "better" or not. Again, it&apos;s fuzzy math — what feels acceptable or even good to one person may not be good for another.<br><br>Take a game running at 50 FPS without frame generation. It&apos;s a provably worse experience to get 50 FPS with framegen — you&apos;d have 25 input samples per second (IPS) and higher input latency. Start increasing that base rendering level, to 30 IPS and 60 FPS, or 35 IPS and 70 FPS... and at some point the look and feel should surpass the baseline 50 FPS and IPS. Where is that crossover point? It varies, by person and game.<br><br>Now do the same with MFG4X. 50 FPS and 12.5 IPS is going to be a terrible experience, so push that to 20 IPS and 80 FPS, or 30 IPS and 120 FPS. Again, eventually it will feel better than the baseline experience. It could be at 35 IPS and 140 FPS, or maybe it&apos;s a bit higher or lower. But somewhere along the curves, MFG should start to look and feel better.<br><br>That&apos;s just one discrete example, and it&apos;s glossing over a lot of the complexity. What happens if the baseline performance is 100 FPS instead of 50, even 150 FPS? For most of us, we reach a point of diminishing returns and so the crossover point might end up being quite a bit lower than when the base performance was only 50 FPS. A steady but lower framerate can also feel better than a higher but inconsistent framerate, as we discussed with Hogwarts Legacy.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="FFVMuHgHgRne94sM9EzQH3" name="Nvidia-Session-6-GeForce-RTX-07.jpg" alt="Nvidia Blackwell RTX 50-series Founders Edition graphics cards" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FFVMuHgHgRne94sM9EzQH3.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="caption-text">Nvidia marketing slide showing RTX 5090 performance using MFG4X. </span><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Nvidia)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Really, the biggest issue with frame generation technologies is the marketing. Look at the above chart showing RTX 5090 performance, compared to the 4090. Nine games were tested, two without support for MFG and seven with MFG. Nvidia used data like this to claim that the 5090 is often over twice as fast as the 4090. It&apos;s deceptive at best, greatly inflating the importance of MFG.<br><br>I&apos;ve used the phrase "frame smoothing" repeatedly throughout this analysis, and for good reason. The AI-powered "generation" of "new" frames is really just a more sophisticated take on temporal interpolation and frame smoothing, something we&apos;ve seen in TVs for over a decade with varying levels of quality. Putting that technology into real-time games ends up being less beneficial than it is for passively viewing content like TV broadcasts and movies.<br><br>Nvidia has said that AI and frame generation technologies aren&apos;t going away, and we believe it. The company will continue to push for more efficient ways to boost the number of frames that get sent to your monitor. However, we are quickly approaching — and probably well past in the case of MFG4X — the point of diminishing returns. Inserting one generated frame between two rendered frames can smooth things out. Generating two or three frames? The experience definitely doesn&apos;t scale linearly.<br><br>It&apos;s disingenuous of marketing to pretend that 200 FPS using MFG4X is anything like 200 FPS with regular framegen, or 200 FPS without framegen. It&apos;s equally laughable to suggest that an RTX 5070 with MFG4X is "as fast as an RTX 4090" with normal framegen. It&apos;s not — and it also lacks the VRAM to keep pace in a variety of other workloads. In either case, the base rendering speed and input sampling rates are critical and interlinked factors.<br><br>A base rendering rate of 200 FPS on a 200 Hz (with adaptive sync) monitor feels completely different than a base rendering rate of 50 FPS quadrupled to 200 "FPS" on the same display. If Nvidia continues with the hubris and tries for RTX 60-series GPUs in a couple of years that generate up to seven frames between two rendered frames, it will be laughably transparent. In such a scenario, "400 FPS!" while rendering at a base 50 FPS would ultimately still feel probably closer to 80~100 FPS, which is basically where MFG4X already lands.<br><br>Subjectively, it&apos;s almost impossible to give an answer to how much better (or worse) things are with frame generation enabled, in all situations. Sometimes it works well, other times it works okay, and still other times it can look slightly better but end up feeling worse. And if MFG is like framegen, sometimes it will break down — as DLSS3 routinely does on the RTX 4060 at higher resolutions.<br><br>Ultimately, it&apos;s the combination of base rendering speed and latency that defines the experience. Get the base performance high enough (above 40 FPS in my general opinion) and keep the latency low enough and you end up with a decent generated result. The higher the base rendering speed, the less frame generation techniques make it feel sluggish — and the less necessary framegen is in the first place.<br><br>What we really need for frame generation is a way to link it to new user input. Something like Reflex 2 with its warping and in-painting combined with frame projection — the prediction of future frames. That&apos;s more complex, but if that can be done, games could actually feel more responsive rather than merely looking smoother. And that&apos;s probably where we&apos;re headed with DLSS 5 in the future. When and if that can be made to work effectively remains to be seen.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ AMD RDNA 4 Radeon RX 9000-series GPUs revealed: Targeting mainstream price and performance with improved AI and ray tracing ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-rdna-4-radeon-rx-9000-series-gpus-revealed-targeting-mainstream-price-and-performance-with-improved-ai-and-ray-tracing</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ AMD announced its new RDNA 4 GPU architecture along with the Radeon RX 9000-series branding, with the RX 9070 XT and RX 9070 arriving in the next couple of months. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">ih6p7rqdvrtcxew9KJw2R6</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AaWNDAASVmnRVKukPgYNQV-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jan 2025 20:13:22 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:51:14 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jarred Walton ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8uFgSGcCzKdFTTQdqonCPi.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jarred&#039;s love of computers dates back to the dark ages, when his dad brought home a DOS 2.3 PC and he left his C-64 behind. He eventually built his first custom PC in 1990 with a 286 12MHz, only to discover it was already woefully outdated when Wing Commander released a few months later. He holds a BS in Computer Science from Brigham Young University and has been working as a tech journalist since 2004, writing for AnandTech, Maximum PC, and PC Gamer. From the first S3 Virge &#039;3D decelerators&#039; to today&#039;s GPUs, Jarred keeps up with all the latest graphics trends and is the one to ask about game performance.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AaWNDAASVmnRVKukPgYNQV-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[AMD]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[AMD RDNA 4 at CES 2025]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[AMD RDNA 4 at CES 2025]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[AMD RDNA 4 at CES 2025]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AaWNDAASVmnRVKukPgYNQV-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>AMD’s RDNA 4 GPUs have seen a few leaks and rumors over the past year, and now AMD has pulled back the curtain a little bit to reveal its next generation Radeon RX 9000-series graphics cards. As expected, AMD will be focusing on the performance-mainstream market, eschewing the extreme end of the performance and pricing ladder — and perhaps skipping the budget segment. Release dates, specifications, and pricing are still under wraps, but at least two of the model names are now official, with two more now effectively confirmed. These will compete with the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">best graphics cards</a>.</p><div class="youtube-video" data-nosnippet ><div class="video-aspect-box"><iframe data-lazy-priority="low" data-lazy-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/60ZJgKyZs3o" allowfullscreen></iframe></div></div><p>We expect to see early samples of AMD’s upcoming GPUs at <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/tag/ces">CES 2025</a> this week, but it remains to be seen just how many details will be shared. This is by no means an official launch of the GPUs, and AMD says it’s only “previewing” RDNA 4 at CES 2025. The launch date at present simply says Q1 2025, and that’s for the first two graphics cards in the lineup. We anticipate other models will become available later in the year, perhaps before June but nothing official has been stated at present. Here’s what we know.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fmFz85hBeiCAmHe5Vanu29.jpg" alt="AMD RDNA 4 at CES 2025" /><figcaption><small role="credit">AMD</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DMDmFn3S9U4Tr6s6zDaN99.jpg" alt="AMD RDNA 4 at CES 2025" /><figcaption><small role="credit">AMD</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>The RDNA 4 architecture name was a given, barring a major change in branding and direction. AMD will move to a 4nm TSMC process node — we don’t know if that’s N4, N4P, or some other variant — which should bring some decent density and efficiency improvements. This will also be the third generation of AMD’s Ray Accelerators, and the second generation of the AI Accelerators and Radiance Display Engine. About the only truly surprising aspect of RDNA 4 is that it took AMD this long to seriously invest in AI cores for its consumer GPUs — the CDNA architectures have had tensor processing units for several years now.<br><br>The fundamental changes haven’t been shared, only somewhat nebulous statements. RDNA 4 will have “optimized” compute units (CUs), “supercharged” AI compute, “improved” ray tracing, and “better” media encoding quality. Those are all good things to see in a new GPU architecture, but until we have additional details, and more importantly, until we’ve been able to put everything to the test, these are merely statements and claims.<br><br>One interesting question is whether or not AMD will continue to utilize the GPU chiplet approach that it introduced with RDNA 3. There was no discussion of that as yet, and it seems like it could go either way. With RDNA 3, AMD had two larger GPUs, Navi 31 and Navi 32, that used a GCD (Graphics Compute Die) matched with anywhere from three to six MCDs (Memory Cache Dies). The lower tier Navi 33 opted to stick with a monolithic design and an older process node.<br><br>RDNA 4 appears to only have two GPUs planned, currently rumored but not confirmed to be called Navi 44 and Navi 48. These should take over for the RX 7600 through RX 7900 XT, based on AMD’s slides, but we don’t have CU counts, memory configurations, or other details at present. We can only hope that AMD will leave the 8GB graphics card era in the past, and if it also uses GDDR7 memory we could even see 3GB chips — meaning 50% more memory capacity for any given interface width, so 12GB on a 128-bit, 18GB on 192-bit, and 24GB on 256-bit. But again, there’s no official information on the memory, cache, or use of chiplets at present.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/n2YHsZqJ7v5jP7DFZT7vi9.jpg" alt="AMD RDNA 4 at CES 2025" /><figcaption><small role="credit">AMD</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Sy7F2w4Hkdsm2FnRd8qwa9.jpg" alt="AMD RDNA 4 at CES 2025" /><figcaption><small role="credit">AMD</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>What AMD did officially disclose is the product branding and we would guess four different GPU names. AMD will sort of skip the Radeon 8000-series, leaving that for integrated solutions on mobile devices using the RDNA 3.5 architecture. There won’t be any 8000-series desktop GPUs. Instead, AMD will use Radeon 9000-series branding, aligning its desktop lineup with the 9000-series Ryzen CPUs. It will also shift to using the tens digit to indicate relative performance levels, to match up with Nvidia’s GPU models.<br><br>At the top, AMD will have a Radeon RX 9070 XT that should take over from the RX 7900 XT and compete with the RTX 4070 Ti/Ti Super and perhaps the RTX 5070 Ti as well — we’ll need to wait and see official specs to determine where the parts actually match up. Below that will be the vanilla Radeon RX 9070, taking over from the 7900 GRE and 7800 XT and gunning for the RTX 5070 presumably. These are the two confirmed GPUs, with a Q1 2025 release date but no other hard information right now.<br><br>AMD also showed the Radeon RX 9060 branding, and presumably we will get at least an RX 9060 XT and an RX 9060. As indicated in the slide, these will take over from the existing RX 7600/7600 XT and the RX 7700 XT. They’ll also compete with Nvidia’s existing RTX 4060 and 4060 Ti cards, and their eventual RTX 5060-class replacements.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vdWjQMWeePYJFWKtmNEZJ9.jpg" alt="AMD RDNA 4 at CES 2025" /><figcaption><small role="credit">AMD</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8oqDwoBvcHxBhf3qDXwcS9.jpg" alt="AMD RDNA 4 at CES 2025" /><figcaption><small role="credit">AMD</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>As part of the enhanced AI aspects, AMD also announced its upcoming FSR 4 upscaling technology, which will use the new and improved RDNA 4 AI Accelerators to provide machine-learning-based upscaling. That should make it similar to Nvidia&apos;s DLSS and Intel&apos;s XeSS, and it appears FSR 4 will be relatively easy to add to existing FSR 3.1 enabled games. Obviously, we&apos;ll need the new GPUs before we can test it.<br><br>AMD also mentioned some AI-based tools like text summary and image generation will be integrated into its Adrenalin AI suite of software. Whether this will be part of the core GPU drivers package or a separate application isn&apos;t entirely clear, but it looks to be similar in principle to some of what Nvidia has done with the Nvidia App.<br><br>Who will end up with the best graphics cards when the dust settles? It’s far too early to say, but we’ll be testing the hardware as soon as we’re able. It’s going to be an exciting year for graphics cards by all appearances.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Nvidia reveals detailed ray tracing differences, promotes DLSS 3 for Indiana Jones and the Great Circle ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/pc-gaming/nvidia-reveals-detailed-ray-tracing-differences-promotes-dlss-3-for-indiana-jones-and-the-great-circle</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ The notoriously-demanding Indiana Jones and the Great Circle gets an official graphics breakdown. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">c2Mwbym4PuJPYEM9UQa96o</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gCkWGU9KqvZ66yNPRLnRYY-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 10 Dec 2024 19:28:28 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:55:46 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[PC Gaming]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Video Games]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Christopher Harper ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qS2hbWnXwNUSmgyAHBQqKB.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Christopher Harper has been a successful freelance tech writer specializing in PC hardware and gaming since 2015, and ghostwrote&amp;nbsp;for various B2B clients in High School before that. Outside of work, Christopher is best known to friends and rivals as an active competitive player in various eSports (particularly fighting games and arena shooters) and a purveyor of music ranging from Jimi Hendrix to Killer Mike to the&amp;nbsp;Sonic Adventure 2&amp;nbsp;soundtrack.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gCkWGU9KqvZ66yNPRLnRYY-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Nvidia, Machine Games]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Machine Games&#039; Indiana Jones and The Great Circle, with full RT effects highlighted by Nvidia.]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Machine Games&#039; Indiana Jones and The Great Circle, with full RT effects highlighted by Nvidia.]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Machine Games&#039; Indiana Jones and The Great Circle, with full RT effects highlighted by Nvidia.]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gCkWGU9KqvZ66yNPRLnRYY-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Last week, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/pc-gaming/indiana-jones-and-the-great-circle-requirements-may-put-your-pc-in-a-museum-minimum-requirements-include-a-core-7-10700k-and-a-ray-tracing-gpu">the (relatively) sky-high system requirements of <em>Indiana Jones and the Great Circle</em></a> proved to be one of the most talked-about stories in PC hardware that week. This week, though, the game is out, and <a href="https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/dlss-full-ray-tracing-indiana-jones-and-the-great-circle/" target="_blank">Nvidia is already promoting it</a>. The extent of its "Full Ray Tracing" graphics feature additions adds some Path Tracing features to a game already built on top of standard Ray Tracing as a requirement.</p><p>Aside from providing some analysis of the optional Path Tracing RT features, the Nvidia posting also clarifies that Indiana Jones and the Great Circle has launched with full support for DLSS 3, including its Frame Generation and Super Resolution features.</p><p>While the required and recommended specifications of this game are indeed high, it's important to note that they do seem to scale with the actual technical ambition of the game. While it's true that <em>Great Circle</em> uses the same id Tech 7 game engine as <em>Doom Eternal</em>, which was eventually retrofitted with RT reflections, Great Circle is built more like <em>Metro Exodus Enhanced Edition</em> since it is <em>fundamentally</em> built around ray-traced lighting and shading from the get-go, even without the Path Tracing/Full Ray Tracing settings enabled.</p><div class="youtube-video" data-nosnippet ><div class="video-aspect-box"><iframe data-lazy-priority="low" data-lazy-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/KcXJE-jvqBw" allowfullscreen></iframe></div></div><p>Where <em>Doom Eternal</em> was aiming for a performant, immersive rip-and-tear gaming experience, <em>Indiana Jones and the Great Circle</em> is instead aiming for a more cinematic, realistic form of immersion, complete with countless Indy lore easter eggs and large-scale interactive levels resembling <em>Hitman</em> far more than <em>Call of Duty</em> or Machine Games' prior <em>Wolfenstein</em> games.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Xqc4nw8L7PqCpSVp2MKaMC.jpg" alt="Indiana Jones and The Great Circle Full RT comparison" /><figcaption>Full RTGI (ray-traced global illumination) example<small role="credit">Machine Games, Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dgMJn4BrD8dpCdXDBaaNAD.jpg" alt="Indiana Jones and The Great Circle Full RT comparison" /><figcaption>Path Traced sun shadows example<small role="credit">Machine Games, Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Of the settings that can be selectively Path-traced, the most high-impact one is certainly Global Illumination, in the form of RTGI. Global illumination ensures that light bounces and reflects properly within a scene, dramatically improving the realism of the lighting. </p><p>Combined with the Path Traced sun shadows setting, you get uber-realistic lighting and shading that distorts, absorbs, and refracts color realistically according to the surroundings. The color that becomes visible within the desert tree leaves is particularly striking with these settings enabled compared to going without.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UUWpYZ7PfQtoKJv6kEL3DC.jpg" alt="Indiana Jones and The Great Circle Full RT comparison" /><figcaption>Path Traced subsurface scattering example<small role="credit">Machine Games, Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MFjdkKYPmNtFp2nE38c5kB.jpg" alt="Indiana Jones and The Great Circle Full RT comparison" /><figcaption>Full resolution RT reflections example<small role="credit">Machine Games, Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Path Traced settings that will be much harder to notice in standard play are Path Traced Foliage subsurface scattering and full-resolution RT reflections. On the note of reflections first, the game requiring RT as a baseline should mean that RT reflections are present either way. </p><p>Still, Nvidia's emphasis on "full resolution" makes us think that this setting could be amping up RT reflections rather than falling back on screen space techniques without them, but further testing is required to validate that. Fortunately, games have been made for decades with the expectation that you aren't doing path-traced reflections, so this setting will be easy to ignore in most scenarios.</p><p>Path Traced foliage subsurface scattering is another easy-to-ignore setting, though truthful, and it does look incredibly cool. For those unfamiliar with subsurface scattering as a graphics technique, it refers to how light interacts (is scattered) beneath a given surface. Usually, subsurface scattering is used to make remarkably realistic human skin and facial animations. However, applying the technique to foliage allows its natural translucency and refractive properties to be reflected in the game. It's an incredibly cool, granular detail— but probably not worth enabling if you're struggling to hit 60 FPS.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ AMD says RDNA 4 GPUs are coming in early 2025 — RX 8000 will deliver ray tracing improvements, AI capabilities ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-rdna-4-coming-in-early-2025-set-to-deliver-ray-tracing-improvements-ai-capabilities</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ AMD confirms RDNA 4 incoming in early 2025, bringing AI, graphics, and ray tracing improvements. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">ZoPGJwtcSmpcNH6qRzUhTo</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FcX9Y8a6b2Uycv2YiAtASc-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 30 Oct 2024 02:42:17 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:56:56 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ ashilov@gmail.com (Anton Shilov) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Anton Shilov ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uMZ5kNphxA2Ut6whdLaSQV.png ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Anton Shilov has been in the PC industry since 1990s playing games, building PCs, and writing stories about pretty much everything that relates to PCs, Macs, smartphones, tablets, and even fab equipment. Over his career, he has worked at a variety of high-ranking websites, including AnandTech, EE Times, TechRadar, X-bit labs, and now Tom&#039;s Hardware. When Anton is not reading or writing about something high-tech, he is probably watching a good movie, playing a video game, or spending time with his family.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FcX9Y8a6b2Uycv2YiAtASc-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[AMD]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Radeon RX 7900 XT(X)]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Radeon RX 7900 XT(X)]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Radeon RX 7900 XT(X)]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FcX9Y8a6b2Uycv2YiAtASc-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Sales of AMD&apos;s Radeon graphics processors dropped sharply in the third quarter compared to the same period a year ago as the company prepared to introduce its next-generation products several months down the road, AMD&apos;s chief executive Lisa Su announced on Tuesday. The first products based on the all-new RDNA 4 architecture — which could become some of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">best graphics cards</a> — are set to be released in early 2025. </p><p>"Graphics, revenue declined year over year as we prepare for transition to our next generation Radeon GPUs based on our RDNA 4 architecture," Su said at the company&apos;s conference call with analysts and investors. "In addition to a strong increase in gaming performance, RDNA 4 delivers significantly higher ray tracing performance, and adds new AI capabilities. We are on track to launch the first RDNA 4 GPUs in early 2025." </p><p>AMD&apos;s lineup of new cards isn&apos;t expected to compete for the highest end of the market — <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-deprioritizing-flagship-gaming-gpus-jack-hyunh-talks-new-strategy-for-gaming-market">AMD recently told us it plans to avoid the &apos;king of the hill&apos; strategy</a>. Instead, the company says it will focus on volume, which typically equates to mid-range high-volume models. </p><p>Ray tracing performance improvements with AMD&apos;s RDNA 4 architecture was discussed in the industry for a while, though this is the first time a high-ranking AMD official has confirmed this. Some <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/leaked-rdna-4-features-suggest-amd-drive-to-catch-up-in-ray-tracing-doubled-rt-intersect-engine-could-come-to-ps5-pro" target="_blank">preliminary details</a> on what could be improved in AMD&apos;s RDNA 4 architecture when it comes to ray tracing have already led, and that information indicates that we could expect doubled ray tracing performance of RDNA 4 GPUs compared to RDNA 3 GPUs, though at this point this is largely speculation. </p><p>As for additional AI capabilities, it is reasonable to expect RDNA 4 to support more instructions aimed at AI workloads and data formats better suitable for machine learning. What remains to be seen is whether all of these enhancements for AI will be enabled on client graphics cards and not reserved for Radeon Pro add-in-boards aimed at workstations and servers. We also know that <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-plans-for-fsr4-to-be-fully-ai-based-designed-to-improve-quality-and-maximize-power-efficiency">AMD is working to make its FSR fully AI-driven</a>. </p><p>An announcement in early 2025 almost certainly means that AMD intends to formally introduce its first RDNA 4-based graphics processors at CES. Launching a gaming GPU after the holiday season is not really common in the industry, as both AMD and Nvidia try to address the needs of gamers with new products before the holiday season when new games are released. This happened to AMD&apos;s RDNA 2 and RDNA 3 families of products and multiple lineups before that. </p><p>Still, GPU designers tend to unveil their new laptop GPUs along with their notebook partners, and the latter prefer to showcase their latest products at trade shows. Therefore, if AMD decides to start rolling out its RDNA 4-based offerings from notebook GPUs (another uncommon decision), then CES would seem to be the right time for a launch.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Black Myth Wukong PC benchmarks: A tour de force for Nvidia's ray tracing hardware [Updated] ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/black-myth-wukong-pc-benchmarks-performance-analysis</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ We’ve benchmarked the PC release of Black Myth Wukong on the latest graphics cards to see how it runs. The game looks stunning, particularly with full ray tracing enabled at maximum quality, but non-Nvidia hardware will be best served using Unreal Engine 5's Lumen rendering. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">WhxwKEj7oiGfUj9D4EgDBf</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/f47Kb3BbWPHjL22NtA29MQ-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Fri, 23 Aug 2024 02:49:39 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:53:11 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[PC Gaming]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Video Games]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jarred Walton ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8uFgSGcCzKdFTTQdqonCPi.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jarred&#039;s love of computers dates back to the dark ages, when his dad brought home a DOS 2.3 PC and he left his C-64 behind. He eventually built his first custom PC in 1990 with a 286 12MHz, only to discover it was already woefully outdated when Wing Commander released a few months later. He holds a BS in Computer Science from Brigham Young University and has been working as a tech journalist since 2004, writing for AnandTech, Maximum PC, and PC Gamer. From the first S3 Virge &#039;3D decelerators&#039; to today&#039;s GPUs, Jarred keeps up with all the latest graphics trends and is the one to ask about game performance.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/f47Kb3BbWPHjL22NtA29MQ-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Game Science]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Black Myth Wukong screenshots]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Black Myth Wukong screenshots]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Black Myth Wukong screenshots]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/f47Kb3BbWPHjL22NtA29MQ-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-black-myth-wukong-a-feast-for-the-eyes"><span>Black Myth Wukong, a feast for the eyes</span></h3><p><a href="https://store.steampowered.com/app/2358720/Black_Myth_Wukong/">Black Myth Wukong</a> launched on August 20, 2024 for PC and console gamers, but if you want to see everything the game has to offer — graphically speaking — you&apos;ll want to play it on an Nvidia GPU. The game supports full ray tracing, often referred to as "path tracing" in Nvidia parlance, and as expected it&apos;s quite brutal in terms of GPU demands. But you don&apos;t need to have an RTX GPU or path tracing to enjoy the game, as even in pure rasterization mode it&apos;s quite beautiful. Our cohorts over at <a href="https://www.pcgamer.com/games/rpg/black-myth-wukong-review/">PCGamer scored it an 87</a>, if you&apos;re wondering whether the game is any good or not.<br><br>We&apos;re more interested in seeing how it runs on some of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">best graphics cards</a>, and we&apos;ve tested most of the latest generation Nvidia, AMD, and Intel GPUs to see how they stack up. There&apos;s also a standalone <a href="https://store.steampowered.com/app/3132990/Black_Myth_Wukong_Benchmark_Tool/" target="_blank">Black Myth benchmarking tool</a>, which uses the same built-in benchmark as the main game, so that&apos;s helpful if you want to check performance.<br><br>[<strong>Update:</strong> We&apos;ve added three RTX 30-series and three RX 6000-series GPUs to the charts. The text has not been updated to reflect the older GPUs&apos; performance, but in general the older cards are slower compared to the current models. That&apos;s 23 GPUs in total tested now, which seems like a good stopping point. Sound off in the comments if you&apos;d like to see anything we&apos;ve skipped.]</p><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">GPU Test PC</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text"><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BCF54SR1">Intel Core i9-13900K</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BL8JC76Q">MSI MEG Z790 Ace DDR5</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09Z1SRR22">G.Skill Trident Z5 2x16GB DDR5-6600 CL34</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BJ1283X8">Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus-G 4TB</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08HGVZXLP">be quiet! 1500W Dark Power Pro 12</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BGR9213C">Cooler Master PL360 Flux</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-11-everything-you-need-to-know">Windows 11 Pro 64-bit</a></p><p class="fancy-box__body-text"><strong>GRAPHICS CARDS</strong><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-review">Nvidia RTX 4090</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-super-review">Nvidia RTX 4080 Super</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-super-review-boosted-clocks-and-core-counts-for-the-same-dollar599-as-the-vanilla-4070">Nvidia RTX 4070 Ti Super</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-super-review-boosted-clocks-and-core-counts-for-the-same-dollar599-as-the-vanilla-4070">Nvidia RTX 4070 Super</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-review">Nvidia RTX 4070</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-ti-16gb-review">Nvidia RTX 4060 Ti 16GB</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-ti-review">Nvidia RTX 4060 Ti</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-review-asus-dual">Nvidia RTX 4060</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top">AMD RX 7900 XTX</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top">AMD RX 7900 XT</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-radeon-rx-7900-gre-review">AMD RX 7900 GRE</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7800-xt-review">AMD RX 7800 XT</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7700-xt-review">AMD RX 7700 XT</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-radeon-rx-7600-xt-review">AMD RX 7600 XT</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7600-review">AMD RX 7600</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a770-limited-edition-review">Intel Arc A770 16GB</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a750-limited-edition-review">Intel Arc A750</a></p></div></div><p>We&apos;re glad to see a full complement of supported technologies from the game, with DLSS 3.7.1 upscaling and frame generation alongside FSR 3.1 upscaling and frame generation, plus <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/xess-13-improves-performance-by-up-to-28-with-refined-image-quality-adds-ultra-quality-plus-and-native-aa-modes">XeSS 1.3</a> upscaling for good measure. There still appear to be some rendering issues with FSR, however, as we noticed far more ghosting and artifacts than with DLSS. We&apos;ve opted to test with 67% scaling in all cases, as we feel most gamers will be better served by the higher performance that offers compared to native resolution, even if there&apos;s the occasional loss in image fidelity.<br><br>For this initial look at how Black Myth Wukong runs on PC, we’ve used our standard GPU test PC, which consists of an Intel Core i9-13900K Raptor Lake CPU, 32GB of DDR5-6400 memory, and a 4TB Crucial T700 PCIe 5.0 SSD for storage. Then we’ve tested most of the current generation AMD, Nvidia, and Intel graphics cards, using the latest drivers from the respective companies. We have preview Nvidia 560.87 drivers — it&apos;s an Nvidia-promoted game, if that wasn&apos;t clear — which have the same game optimizations as the public <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-announces-20-new-dlss-3-titles-at-gamescom-latest-driver-embraces-new-rtx-4070-gddr6">560.94 drivers</a>. We&apos;re also using AMD 24.7.1 and Intel 5971 drivers, though AMD&apos;s drivers are not "game ready" for Black Myth Wukong.<br><br>We aren&apos;t testing every current gen GPU, choosing instead to skip the Nvidia RTX 4080 and RTX 4070 Ti, replacing them with their newer Super variants. Testing is also ongoing, as it takes quite a while to get through all the settings we want to look at for each card, so we&apos;ll be adding some of the missing data over the coming day or two, and we may add some previous generation GPUs as a reference point as well.<br><br>We&apos;re testing with the medium preset at 1080p, again with 67% scaling manually dialed in — the game always seems to drop that one point to 66% scaling after you exit the menu (and will drop from 66% to 65% if you start there, FYI). We also test with the &apos;cinematic&apos; preset at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K, again with 67% scaling manually dialed in. Nearly all of the testing has been done without frame generation, simply because we find that feature to be more of a marketing item than something that truly improves the overall gaming experience, though we do have one chart where we enabled framegen just to show how the game runs in that mode.<br><br>Our baseline testing runs in pure rasterization mode (i.e. using Unreal Engine&apos;s Lumen), for what will become obvious reasons. Then we use the same settings as before, except with the "Full Ray Tracing" turned on, using the low RT preset combined with medium quality and then the very high RT settings with the cinematic preset at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. We also test with maxed out 1080p settings with frame generation enabled as one final data point, to see how that affects "performance" — or at least the number of generated frames delivered to your monitor.<br><br>We&apos;ll have screenshots and a discussion of image fidelity at the various settings later, but it&apos;s easy to dismiss the full RT option at first. It&apos;s a bit of a wash in terms of what it does to the visuals at the low and medium settings, while the very high option kills performance — particularly on non-Nvidia GPUs. It does improve the visuals of the game, adding a lot of details, but it&apos;s very much a feature designed for those with at least an RTX 4070 or faster GPU.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-black-myth-wukong-medium-gpu-performance"><span>Black Myth Wukong Medium GPU performance</span></h3><p>But let&apos;s start with the rasterization performance. Each setting gets run at least twice, using the higher result; the first test (i.e. after launching the game) gets run three times and we discard the first result. The built-in benchmark lasts about 145 seconds, if you&apos;re wondering, so that&apos;s a lot of time required to test up to nine different settings on each GPU.<br><br>We start with the medium preset, which offers a good blend of visual fidelity and performance. Unreal Engine&apos;s Lumen and Nanite technologies are put to good use, though classifying Lumen as "software ray tracing" is a bit of a stretch — it&apos;s more accurate to call it "shader-based rendering with some calculations that approximate ray tracing," which is basically what "rasterization" means in my bood. There are elements of the tech that may qualify as RT-lite, but reflections are one example where it&apos;s using traditional screen space reflections. We&apos;ll have more to say about that in the image quality discussion.<br><br>One other item to mention is that the game uses upscaling by default at all settings. It uses a slider with a range of 25 to 100 — that&apos;s 16X upscaling to native, if you&apos;re wondering. It will set the scale to 66% at 1080p, 50% at 1440p, and 44% at 4K (and 80% at 1600x900 if you&apos;re wondering — only 720p defaults to 100% scaling).<br><br>If you&apos;re used to the standard Quality, Balanced, and Performance upscaling modes, the values used by Black Myth Wukong are more aggressive in general. Quality mode normally means ~2X upscaling, or ~71% of the target resolution; Balanced mode uses ~3X upscaling, or ~58% scaling; and Performance mode uses ~4X upscaling, or 50% of the target resolution. (DLSS, FSR, and XeSS can use slightly different values as well, depending on the game and version, but we&apos;re trying not to get too bogged down in the nitty gritty details.)<br><br>For our purposes, we don&apos;t want to rely on different scaling values, so we set a static 67% scaling for all of our testing. That means we&apos;re rendering at 1280x720 for 1080p output, 1707x960 for 1440p output, and 2560x1440 for 4K output. If we used the game&apos;s defaults, the render resolutions would be 1280x720, 1280x720, and 1707x960 for those same respective outputs — which would mean the 1080p and 1440p results would be quite similar, other than differences in upscaling overhead. Running the game at maximum settings at native rendering is a good way to further reduce performance, if you like lower fps for whatever reason.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.05%;"><img id="hZJ3pTf5RJmZp2TvVPfo3j" name="GPUPerf-b1-1-1080p-Med.png" alt="Black Myth: Wukong GPU performance" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hZJ3pTf5RJmZp2TvVPfo3j.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1441" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Our first look at performance seems quite good overall. Nearly everything we tested easily breaks 60 fps. Sure, older generation GPUs are more likely to struggle, and we&apos;ll try to test some of those in the near future, but you only need a budget $200 graphics card to have a good experience in Black Myth Wukong.<br><br>The <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-vs-nvidia-gpus">AMD vs Nvidia</a> results are also pretty reasonable. We&apos;re used to seeing the 4080 Super just ahead of the 7900 XTX, for example, and the 7900 XT usually ends up pretty close to the 4070 Ti Super. Some of the lower tier AMD cards don&apos;t match up as well, though. If you look at our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html">GPU benchmarks</a> hierarchy, focusing on the rasterization performance, the 7700 XT beats the 4060 Ti by 16%; here, it&apos;s only 4% faster. The 7800 XT likewise beats the vanilla RTX 4070 by 6%, but here it&apos;s 1% slower.<br><br>It&apos;s not too surprising, perhaps, as Black Myth Wukong has been heavily promoted by Nvidia. Even though Unreal Engine 5 on its own should be somewhat GPU agnostic, developers need to tune it for their particular game, and that can lead to vendor specific optimizations.<br><br>What about Intel Arc? Well, despite having game ready drivers, it&apos;s really part of an older generation of hardware — it was designed to compete with the RTX 3060, and mostly does so in games where drivers don&apos;t hold it back. It&apos;s also a lot like Nvidia GPUs in that it often performs worse than AMD &apos;equivalents&apos; in rasterization games, but comes out ahead with ray tracing.<br><br>The A770 16GB and A750 end up as the two slowest GPUs that we&apos;ve tested so far, with the A770 just barely edging past 60 fps while the A750 only manages 52 fps. The A770 also has 14% more raw compute than the A750, plus more memory, so performing 20% better than the A750 isn&apos;t totally out of the ordinary — just a bit wider of a gap than we normally see. Minimums are also lower on the Intel GPUs, and the numbers further driver optimizations could be beneficial. These aren&apos;t unexpected results, though, as the A770 and A750 also rank below the RX 7600 in our GPU hierarchy.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-black-myth-wukong-cinematic-gpu-performance"><span>Black Myth Wukong Cinematic GPU performance</span></h3><p>Before we get to the results of the &apos;cinematic&apos; preset, let&apos;s be clear: We&apos;re not trying to show the best mix of settings for the various GPUs. Our purpose is to show how the GPUs stack up, in terms of performance potential, and so we like to punish the GPUs with maxed out settings.<br><br>If you&apos;re looking to just play Black Myth Wukong, the high preset tends to run about 50~60 percent faster than the cinematic preset and is what we recommend for most users in this particular game. We&apos;ll discuss the various presets and image fidelity later, but there are very much diminishing returns when going beyond the high preset.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.05%;"><img id="LUAjCnVz9h3CABrs4MUfAj" name="GPUPerf-b1-2-1080p-Cine.png" alt="Black Myth: Wukong GPU performance" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LUAjCnVz9h3CABrs4MUfAj.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1441" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>There&apos;s a pretty massive hit to performance when using the cinematic preset, and you can see why the game defaults to turning on upscaling. All of the GPUs we tested see their performance cut in half, or more, relative to the medium preset. Nearly everything is still technically playable, but you&apos;ll need at least an RTX 4070 Super to get above 60 fps at these settings.<br><br>The same patterns as before hold here as well. The AMD and Nvidia matchups generally look close at the top, but as you go down the performance ladder the RTX GPUs punch slightly above their normal weight class. The 4060 Ti might cost as much as a 7700 XT, but for rasterization performance AMD usually comes out with a clear lead.<br><br>Intel&apos;s Arc GPUs again take up position at the bottom of the chart. The A770 is only about 10% slower than the RX 7600, which isn&apos;t too far off what we normally see for rasterization games, but it&apos;s also falling just shy of 30 fps, with minimums dipping into the upper teens. We&apos;ve also seen other games where the 8GB A750 struggles, even when other 8GB GPUs don&apos;t, and at least so far that doesn&apos;t seem to be a major issue with Black Myth Wukong. The A770 comes out 17% ahead of the A750, which is pretty much right in line with the difference in compute teraflops.<br><br>We didn&apos;t run the high preset on every GPU, due to time constraints, but as you&apos;ll see in our image quality analysis, that tends to be the sweet spot in terms of balancing image fidelity and performance. As mentioned above, it runs about 50~60 percent faster than the cinematic preset, and in general it looks nearly as good. The minor differences in shadows and foliage aren&apos;t enough to warrant the performance hit in our opinion.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.05%;"><img id="iYhb4EyV5JUgQJvbYziVHj" name="GPUPerf-b1-3-1440p-Cine.png" alt="Black Myth: Wukong GPU performance" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iYhb4EyV5JUgQJvbYziVHj.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1441" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Moving up to 1440p with the cinematic preset, performance doesn&apos;t drop too much compared to 1080p. That&apos;s perhaps partly because we have 67% scaling enabled, but the GPUs we tested are all around 12~17 percent slower than at the lower resolution.<br><br>That&apos;s enough to drop a few cards below acceptable rates — the RTX 4060 and below are all pretty marginal at these settings — but tweaks to the settings should allow these cards to handle 1440p at lower settings. Obviously, there are plenty of GPUs that are slower than the ones we&apos;ve tested, and older cards aren&apos;t going to like 1440p.<br><br>The standings of the individual GPUs haven&apos;t shifted at all compared to 1080p medium. That&apos;s an interesting result, as usually there are at least a few shifts. Also notice that the RTX 4060 Ti 16GB and 8GB, along with the RX 7600 XT and vanilla 7600, offer basically identical performance. Clearly we&apos;re not exceeding 8GB of VRAM four our testing.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.05%;"><img id="cPgVzxqjLW5Qjm9TrM8LQj" name="GPUPerf-b1-4-4K-Cine.png" alt="Black Myth: Wukong GPU performance" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cPgVzxqjLW5Qjm9TrM8LQj.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1441" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>4K cinematic once again results in nearly identical standings, with the Arc A770 being the only position change. There&apos;s a less than normal drop in performance as well (compared to other games) when looking at these 4K results compared to 1440p. That&apos;s at least partly because of upscaling, as otherwise native 4K rendering often bumps up VRAM requirements... but we&apos;ve seen plenty of other games exceed 8GB of VRAM use, so it&apos;s a bit of a breath of fresh air to see the RX 7600, RTX 4060, and RTX 4060 Ti all managing to keep pace.<br><br>Those GPUs we just named aren&apos;t playable at 4K, mind you, but they&apos;re slow because of the demands of the game engine, not because they&apos;re thrashing on VRAM allocation. If you want at least borderline playable, you&apos;ll need the RX 7800 XT or RTX 4070 as a minimum for 4K (yes, with upscaling).<br><br>Curiously, and this is something we&apos;ve seen in other games, the Arc A750 does fall off the pace here, even while other 8GB cards do fine. It&apos;s not a big deal, because even though 19 fps is much higher than 11 fps, neither Arc GPU can really deal with 4K in Black Myth Wukong. As we&apos;ll see on the next tests with full RT, Intel&apos;s drivers do appear to need more tuning for this game.<br><br>What about hitting 60 fps at 4K, though? The only GPU to manage that is the mighty RTX 4090. It will probably be joined by at least the RTX 5080 and 5090 when those <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-blackwell-rtx-50-series-gpus-everything-we-know">Nvidia Blackwell GPUs</a> arrive, and maybe by an <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/leaked-rdna-4-features-suggest-amd-drive-to-catch-up-in-ray-tracing-doubled-rt-intersect-engine-could-come-to-ps5-pro">RDNA 4 GPU</a> or two as well, but those are seemingly months away at best.<br><br>As said above, the high preset should improve performance by around 50~60 percent, perhaps more in some cases. That would make 4K viable for 4060 Ti and above, and maybe even the 4060 and RX 7600 in a pinch.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-black-myth-wukong-full-ray-tracing-performance"><span>Black Myth Wukong full ray tracing performance</span></h3><p>If the results from the cinematic testing seemed at times pretty poor, just wait until you see what happens with full RT enabled. Again, check our image fidelity commentary below, where we have screenshots and a deeper discussion of how the game looks. Here, we&apos;re just looking at the performance.<br><br>We tested using the medium preset with full RT set to low as our "easy RT" option, and then we used the cinematic preset with full RT on very high for maximum image quality — and maximum punishment of your poor graphics card. If you&apos;ve seen performance results from other full RT implementations like <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/cyberpunk-2077-rt-overdrive-path-tracing-full-path-tracing-fully-unnecessary">Cyberpunk 2077&apos;s RT Overdrive</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/alan-wake-2-will-punish-your-gpu">Alan Wake 2</a>, you probably already know what to expect.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.05%;"><img id="6LkwBfBqXCoDee4ybB6MXj" name="GPUPerf-b1-5-1080p-MedRT.png" alt="Black Myth: Wukong GPU performance" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6LkwBfBqXCoDee4ybB6MXj.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1441" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>This is where we get to a tale of two GPU types: Nvidia and everything else. For the RTX 40-series GPUs, our medium RT testing runs okay. Everything from the RTX 4060 and up breaks 60 fps — and again, that&apos;s without using DLSS 3 frame generation. The game is definitely playable at these settings for team green&apos;s latest GPUs, though we&apos;ll have to see about adding some RTX 30-series results if we can find the time.<br><br>The other side of the coin is the AMD results, which start just below the 4060 if you have the ~$900 RX 7900 XTX and only get worse from there. Considering the 7900 XTX comes pretty close to the performance of the 4080 Super in the rasterization results, seeing it drop to less than half that level of performance means most AMD users shouldn&apos;t even bother with the full RT option, other than to perhaps see what it looks like.<br><br>At least the RX 7700 XT and above are technically playable; the RX 7600 and 7600 XT and below, not so much. Interestingly, VRAM capacity still doesn&apos;t seem to matter much, even with full RT. The RX 7600 XT and RX 7600 — as well as the RTX 4060 Ti 16GB and RTX 4060 Ti — basically offer the same level of performance. Unreal Engine 5 may have some faults, but Black Myth Wukong manages some amazing visuals without requiring a boatload of VRAM...<br><br>...Unless you have an Intel Arc A750 (and presumably the other 8GB Arc cards as well). Here again, the A770 16GB offers quite a bit more performance, more than just the raw compute should provide. It&apos;s 33% faster than the A750 on average fps, but more tellingly it&apos;s nearly twice as high on 1% low fps. The A750 also consistently dropped in performance after our initial test run with full RT enabled, so the drivers need some work in that regard. (We saw the same thing with 8GB Arc GPUs in the Bright Memory Infinite benchmark that finally got fixed last year, incidentally.)</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.05%;"><img id="bMdHCVMLJyn9x4NfvUmwdj" name="GPUPerf-b1-6-1080p-CineRT.png" alt="Black Myth: Wukong GPU performance" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bMdHCVMLJyn9x4NfvUmwdj.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1441" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>If our &apos;medium RT&apos; testing results looked back, the &apos;maximum RT&apos; performance truly hurts. The RTX 4070 Super and above manage to average 60 fps or more, and the RTX 4060 and above are still perhaps playable with more than 30 fps. But AMD&apos;s fastest GPU right now can&apos;t even break 30 fps, and it only gets worse from here.<br><br>Also, while the arc A770 16GB does respectably, nearly catching the RX 7700 XT, the A750 performance falls off a cliff. Again, drivers, and we&apos;ll just skip any further testing of the A750 in Black Myth Wukong for now. This is also why we didn&apos;t bother testing the A580, as we expect it to have similar issues.<br><br>There are image quality reasons to use the full RT very high setting, as it stabilizes the foliage shadows, adds some nice reflections, improves overall scene lighting, and even has caustics on the water. You can mostly get the same image quality by using the high preset with maxed out RT, but that won&apos;t really improve performance much as many of the default rendering options get overridden by RT anyway.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.05%;"><img id="mFcscuXBKttbiXSvKMiekj" name="GPUPerf-b1-7-1440p-CineRT.png" alt="Black Myth: Wukong GPU performance" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mFcscuXBKttbiXSvKMiekj.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1441" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>1440p with maxed out settings, including RT, only gets above 60 fps on the RTX 4090. You could use higher levels of upscaling as well, but image fidelity will degrade if you go that route. But if you have Nvidia&apos;s reigning champion, it still chugs along at a comfortable 76 fps.<br><br>AMD&apos;s GPUs all fall below 20 fps now, so unless you like trying to play a slideshow you&apos;ll want to stick with less demanding settings. But again, we note that VRAM capacity hasn&apos;t shown up as a limiting factor for Black Myth Wukong. We can also see this by the GPU power draw, which is basically hitting the specified limit for all the cards we tested. Normally, if you hit VRAM capacity constraints, power use will drop quite a bit due to the GPU being forced to wait for data.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.05%;"><img id="WdJPC7zvcayHirXnQ6KFzj" name="GPUPerf-b1-8-4K-CineRT.png" alt="Black Myth: Wukong GPU performance" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WdJPC7zvcayHirXnQ6KFzj.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1441" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>And last but not least (unless you&apos;re talking about framerates), we have 4K with fully maxed out settings. The RTX 4090 averages 44 fps, and the 4080 Super just squeaks past 30 fps, with minimums dropping to the mid-20s. Everything else lands in unplayable land. We&apos;re a long way from doing full RT with all the bells and whistles on games with the graphical complexity of Black Myth Wukong, in other words.<br><br>AMD&apos;s single-digit results are clearly less than ideal, and we can only wonder whether it&apos;s a lack of RT hardware performance or if the game simply doesn&apos;t have any optimizations for doing full RT on AMD hardware. Probably it&apos;s both of those things, to varying degrees.<br><br>If you want to create a 4K chart that makes it look like a viable option, the solution is simple. First, use higher levels of upscaling — the game normally would use about a 5X upscaling factor at 4K. Then turn on framegen. Then you can show the <a href="https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/black-myth-wukong-full-ray-tracing-dlss-3/" target="_blank">RTX 4070 Ti Super hitting 66 fps like Nvidia does</a>.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-1080p-maxed-out-settings-with-frame-generation"><span>1080p maxed out settings with frame generation</span></h3><p>Frame generation is often a highly controversial feature, and rightly so. Some people refer to the generated frames as "fake frames," and they&apos;re not really wrong. Because there&apos;s no additional sampling of user input, and with the added overhead of framegen, it often feels more like a case of two steps backward to go two steps — maybe 2.5 steps — forward.<br><br>Let&apos;s give a concrete example, though, before we get to the performance chart. Suppose you have a game that&apos;s running at 50 fps, and you&apos;re hoping to improve that result via frame generation. In a best-case scenario, framegen would double your frames to monitor rate up to 100 fps, while adding a bit of latency. If that&apos;s how it usually worked, we&apos;d be far more forgiving of the tech.<br><br>The reality is that if you&apos;re running at 50 fps, turning on framegen typically has a decent amount of overhead. Instead of a simple doubling of framerates — half of which are generated — what you usually get is around 50% higher perceived fps. But a result of 75 fps using framegen means the base fps has dropped to 37.5 fps, which can definitely start to feel a bit sluggish if you&apos;re attuned to such things.<br><br>The TLDR is that for frame generation to offer a decent experience, we typically want the generated framerate to be over 80 fps — meaning the user input sampling rate would still be 40 fps. There are situations where that can happen, but Black Myth Wukong with maxed out full RT settings running at 4K tends to be a bit too demanding on most GPUs, unless you have an RTX 4080 or 4090.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.05%;"><img id="53jB4n5AWX93T8Q8NcSLsj" name="GPUPerf-b1-9-1080p-MedRTFG.png" alt="Black Myth: Wukong GPU performance" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/53jB4n5AWX93T8Q8NcSLsj.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1441" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Disclaimers aside, we did at least want to provide some performance data with framegen. We used our maxed out settings at 1080p — so the cinematic preset with very high RT quality, plus 67% resolution scaling. Then we turned on frame generation: DLSS 3 for RTX cards and FSR 3 for AMD and Intel cards (XeSS doesn&apos;t currently have its own flavor of framegen). That gives us the above chart.<br><br>There are some interesting results, like the fact that FSR3 framegen boosts the framerate much more than DLSS3 framegen. Part of may be because the AMD GPUs are tanking so hard with the full RT settings we used for testing. But the RTX 4070 as an example gets 77 fps with framegen, versus 53 fps without, so that&apos;s a 45% increase. We&apos;d call that maybe acceptable, at best — going from a rendered 53 fps to 38.5 fps, but with framegen doubling that.<br><br>The RX 7900 XTX on the other hand goes from 28 fps to 52 fps, an 85% improvement. If we were looking at that level of scaling with a generated fps result of 100, it would be excellent, but 52 fps generated means the game feels like it&apos;s running at 26 fps. And that&apos;s AMD&apos;s best result. Still, thanks to the better scaling (and we&apos;re not discussing framegen image quality, which often involves more compromise), the RX 7900 XTX and XT are finally able to at least surpass the performance of the RTX 4060. Yay?<br><br>The 7900 GRE as a second example goes from 20.9 fps to 39.3 fps, for an 88% boost in framerate, but less than 40 fps with framegen enabled just isn&apos;t a great experience. We tried it, we didn&apos;t like it, and we died a lot more often in Black Myth Wukong as a result. It&apos;s not completely unplayable, but it&apos;s also not the same as a non-framegen 40 fps. The other AMD GPUs are likewise far from delivering a good experience using these settings — framegen can only do so much.<br><br>Of course you can get much higher framerates, via framegen, if you&apos;re not using ray tracing — or if you just have a high-end RTX 40-series card. The 4070 Ti Super, 4080 Super, and 4090 all break into the desirable 100+ fps range in our 1080p testing, for example. It&apos;s about a 45~50 percent increase in framerate for all three, so the gains are reasonably consistent. The base rendered fps still drops, but the result is certainly acceptable in terms of being playable.<br><br>The other Nvidia GPUs aren&apos;t quite as good of an experience. The 4070 Super and 4070 run okay, but the 4060 Ti and below fall below 60 fps, which means they may look like they&apos;re running okay but they feel like they&apos;re running at less than 30 fps. That&apos;s been our experience with framegen, at least.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="uLsZsuJ858TDCzqjYtxQPP" name="black-myth-wukong-screenshots-5.jpg" alt="Black Myth Wukong screenshots" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uLsZsuJ858TDCzqjYtxQPP.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Game Science)</span></figcaption></figure><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-black-myth-wukong-settings-and-image-quality"><span>Black Myth Wukong settings and image quality</span></h3><p>You&apos;ve seen the performance disparity, with Nvidia destroying the competition in full ray tracing performance but with reasonably close rasterization performance overall. How much of a difference do these settings make in practice? As usual, it&apos;s a more nuanced discussion — which you can read as "you definitely don&apos;t need full ray tracing to enjoy the game" if you prefer.<br><br>Black Myth Wukong uses Unreal Engine 5, including the Nanite feature that allows for incredible levels of detail. It also uses the software-based Lumen RT for lighting and other effects, however, which definitely isn&apos;t perfect. Alternatively, you can enable the full RT option that &apos;fixes&apos; some of the less desirable rendering aspects of Lumen — shimmering and blobby shadows, broken (occluded) screen space reflections, and some other aspects. Lumen doesn&apos;t leverage RT hardware in GPUs like the RTX 40-series and RX 7000-series, but it does run even on older DX11-class GPUs like the GTX 1060 and RX 580.<br><br>The pros and cons of the Lumen rendering engine are starting to become reasonably well known. It looks very nice most of the time, and Black Myth Wukong is often a stunning looking game. But occasional stuttering can be a problem, and even high-end PC hardware may not be enough. While the full RT lighting does look better, for most gamers, Lumen looks "good enough" and runs much better on a wider variety of hardware than the full RT mode. Put another way, using software approximations for rendering is often preferable to more accurate RT rendering that runs significantly slower.<br><br>Something else to mention again is that this is an Nvidia promoted game. While it uses Unreal Engine 5, it&apos;s not clear how much optimization was done specifically for Nvidia hardware, especially for the full ray tracing mode. Another interesting tidbit is that Black Myth Wukong doesn&apos;t support Nvidia&apos;s <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-reveals-dlss-35-ai-powered-ray-reconstruction">DLSS 3.5 Ray Reconstruction</a> technology, which seems like a missed opportunity. As we&apos;ve discussed with <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-dlss-35-tested-ai-powered-graphics-leaves-competitors-behind">Cyberpunk 2077 Phantom Liberty</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/alan-wake-2-will-punish-your-gpu">Alan Wake 2</a>, if a game is going to support a feature that practically requires an Nvidia GPU, why not include DLSS 3.5 support as well? It offers clearly superior visuals in the games that support at, often with a performance benefit as well. Perhaps it will get added in a post-launch patch to Black Myth Wukong.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BXVjCTWuWg7XdwR3FRswr8.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Nvidia Cinematic plus Very High ray tracing<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vjqqgPUJi8LMKP82uMkC8A.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>AMD Cinematic plus Very High ray tracing<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/p3D6SBCEBgHd5rjMiNYPHB.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Nvidia Cinematic with Lumen (no ray tracing)<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tWDpdFErWDVzYaxU2KmQT8.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>AMD Cinematic with Lumen (no ray tracing)<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2mbLyrhAzjGDWSitSRpNpH.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Nvidia Cinematic plus Very High ray tracing<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YLAMkQxFtRUZ8S3tZ2NGXG.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>AMD Cinematic plus Very High ray tracing<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/enSNTKhYUb5SikGRLi39rE.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Nvidia Cinematic with Lumen (no ray tracing)<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ypyq2B7Eg2AdmZTa5ByiRC.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>AMD Cinematic with Lumen (no ray tracing)<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xV5qeAgTCFNzSazbWcXPDD.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Nvidia Cinematic plus Very High ray tracing<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sp4xwwgqZesoh4BJSRQCh9.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>AMD Cinematic plus Very High ray tracing<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/q5ehRnSurd8HVx7w9WzsoC.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Nvidia Cinematic with Lumen (no ray tracing)<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rwx3CKf6AXnV2sHomNgL48.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>AMD Cinematic with Lumen (no ray tracing)<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DUxp98BLYxYAiCdzp2VXwG.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Nvidia Cinematic plus Very High ray tracing<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Mb6eQsnbnatqMykwAy2fbD.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>AMD Cinematic plus Very High ray tracing<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/23eEkxjxHEm6hVcr7SW56G.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Nvidia Cinematic with Lumen (no ray tracing)<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rMNgFXf99A324TzGTKnSL9.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>AMD Cinematic with Lumen (no ray tracing)<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>To start, we have four different screenshot collections, taken from captured videos of the benchmark sequence so that we can get close to identical frames. That&apos;s not ideal, as it introduces video compression artifacts, but since enabling or disabling ray tracing requires a restart of the game, not to mention the need to swap GPUs, we felt this was at least a good starting point.<br><br>We&apos;ve captured the cinematic preset, running at 1080p with 67% scaling (FSR3 for AMD and DLSS3 for Nvidia), on an <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top">AMD RX 7900 XTX</a> and an <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-super-review">Nvidia RTX 4080 Super</a>. The two cards offer generally similar rasterization performance, with slightly higher prices on the Nvidia card but also slightly higher performance. For each GPU, we captured screenshots with and without full ray tracing (at the maximum very high setting) enabled.<br><br>As we said above, the differences can at times seem nuanced. There&apos;s clearly some benefit from the RT lighting, shadows, and reflections in some of the comparisons, but there are also clear differences between the AMD and Nvidia results.<br><br>First, it&apos;s pretty obvious that DLSS provides a generally clearer image right now. FSR image quality is being worked on, according to the developers, so things should improve over time. For now, FSR upscaling causes a loss of fine detail in some areas, and the overall blurriness becomes even more noticeable when looking at the ray traced results.<br><br>Comparing the ray tracing images to the rasterization results again shows some very obvious differences in every scene, but the changes aren&apos;t always clearly in favor of ray tracing — like in the fourth sequence where there aren&apos;t any reflections to discuss, the shadows and lighting look different but not inherently superior with RT. That&apos;s partly because these are still shots rather than moving images, however.<br><br>One aspect of the RT effects that&apos;s worth pointing out is the support for particle-based reflections, which isn&apos;t something that the benchmark sequence shows. There are some battles where the addition of reflected lightning as an example looks visually striking and you notice its loss when you turn off RT — but you&apos;ll also need to use the very high setting for RT to get those particle reflections, which rules out non-Nvidia cards unless you&apos;re running 1080p with higher levels of FSR upscaling.<br><br>Overall, the ray tracing can look impressive, and it&apos;s cool to see a game like this supporting the feature, even if it&apos;s generally impractical on a lot of GPUs. At least it&apos;s something people can point to and say, "This is what full ray tracing can bring to the table, and it&apos;s also why it&apos;s nowhere near going mainstream right now." If you have a high-end Nvidia GPU, you can definitely get decent performance with full ray tracing, particularly if you&apos;re willing to tweak a few settings and use higher levels of upscaling.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1434px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:32.43%;"><img id="RBH6rsBP7H5tK35iKE4ABP" name="RT-Features-Matrix.png" alt="Black Myth Wukong screenshots" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RBH6rsBP7H5tK35iKE4ABP.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1434" height="465" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Game Science)</span></figcaption></figure><p>The other thing we want to look at is how the various presets compare in overall image quality, with and without ray tracing. There are five standard presets: low, medium, high, very high, and cinematic. The last two of those can definitely move into the realm of placebo effect, at least as far as image fidelity goes, but their performance impact is very real. But there are three RT options as well: low, medium, and very high.<br><br>You can use any of those three RT options with each of the global presets, or you can even opt to customize the ten individual settings — there&apos;s no real customization of the RT options, though, other than the three preset levels. Black Myth Wukong uses ReSTIR global illumination for its lighting effects, and it also supports RT shadows, RT reflections, and RT caustics.<br><br>You can see the breakdown of what RT options are used for each of the RT presets in the above image. Below, we have a gallery of screenshots showing the five graphics presets without RT, plus three more images (for each scene) using the high preset with the three different RT options, and then a final three with the cinematic preset and the three full RT options.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pmh8zLZa6ZiHP59MMGKzgJ.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Low preset<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YB3XRbg8tLE4bb7EsS5zzD.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Medium preset<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7CCemANNtrE54KwJhSPnEJ.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>High preset<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mCgE5eyexhqGEc9pFL8aNH.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Very High preset<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Yv77N3VK9cVSoqD2we2PQE.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Cinematic preset<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xDcRMt4PPr74MiGg7i4reF.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>High preset with Full RT on Low<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PpmDMpkEqSs8VFqKXWZiWA.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>High preset with Full RT on Medium<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v7tUHWTszQwEwUCLCENndB.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>High preset with Full RT on Very High<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yLdjrsMxkTBioByfYb6UGF.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Cinematic preset with Full RT on Low<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VJrMRF3JdSiuHbZycFQYqA.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Cinematic preset with Full RT on Medium<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/732mDWRaPUQG9eNfUJZnzB.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Cinematic preset with Full RT on Very High<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rqJg2fdHcqDpyeMbEkrUDS.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Low preset<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/c6hqmHkfUbCsVZxLmJSZjS.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Medium preset<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4gRt7UU7tN68PDiEqdtz7a.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>High preset<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EPaKJPUGyzASLiRVWQwW7N.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Very High preset<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5GgZkYsz5n5ZYr75eiV9cN.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Cinematic preset<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/32jUSprtxLhuMaCcW3VgKU.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>High preset with Full RT on Low<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2ZiZ9kn9gv2Qfkqqaxdn8P.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>High preset with Full RT on Medium<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eeHMeUCsGPXHks6cNdH7nT.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>High preset with Full RT on Very High<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7AAtTaeLq3WeKXkewbWsCb.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Cinematic preset with Full RT on Low<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mez9TjqwjbcgiYtur6c4eQ.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Cinematic preset with Full RT on Medium<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/y7EU98F2ZLXecUC8x5zLqU.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Cinematic preset with Full RT on Very High<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v3xqTTqRthSXYnnXSzJvAK.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Low preset<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BRvAYuXr52xYU95dz2Nijb.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Medium preset<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eywAF5do2LYF3NHMgyrNWY.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>High preset<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WSHn3R3hocsnJMu89e4BuW.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Very High preset<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MhgKdDNdvhiKP9cZDJwqNW.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Cinematic preset<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/i7oyQDLjA2RQHg3j5R5ByX.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>High preset with Full RT on Low<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dTZ2ZH3WwznKwEtxnjZ3aZ.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>High preset with Full RT on Medium<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/67AjYizJtaS25uRKr6Zh3Z.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>High preset with Full RT on Very High<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AWsCZw22om5jpwJZKCQd7M.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Cinematic preset with Full RT on Low<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6DrfFY4Sedrwo2ro2ZWBfR.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Cinematic preset with Full RT on Medium<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qurhgSik8X2UNLSpC6pZea.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Cinematic preset with Full RT on Very High<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zfw5K95ioLckQtoYcpwnSX.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Low preset<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4nSVavts8jDXa6UPFaYebM.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Medium preset<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3rGQ2RzbWWuZXNHg4LWPdP.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>High preset<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aJ8xGwd3LtVThG7u8vb6eK.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Very High preset<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uat9CbRVBpsd9UAtahUu7Q.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Cinematic preset<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qVAHT5oaZ6YcPUjNWQbbFT.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>High preset with Full RT on Low<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z4pCtTgJ4Q5ZZFmdYYU6MV.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>High preset with Full RT on Medium<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2i8ECnbLZPqhdkWmaUeTrV.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>High preset with Full RT on Very High<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Cfng3UQgWx56wm9HNhCAcL.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Cinematic preset with Full RT on Low<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nF729uhhgJWLktaVmprk8L.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Cinematic preset with Full RT on Medium<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SjUyDP2Xo4SZnusS4585AR.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>Cinematic preset with Full RT on Very High<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Even the low preset looks pretty decent, a testament to how good Unreal Engine 5 looks, though the minimum setting does compromise on things like lighting, texture, and shadow quality — there&apos;s no dynamic shadows to speak of, and lots of areas that should show a static shadow simply don&apos;t. The cutoff point for shadows is also very noticeable when moving around in the game world if you&apos;re on the low setting, and the amount of vegetation also gets reduced quite a lot.<br><br>Medium represents a more reasonable compromise that a lot of PCs should be able to manage without too much difficulty. The shadows look good, there&apos;s more vegetation, and everything looks like what we&apos;d expect from a demanding modern game. Certainly, no one should feel bad about "only" being able to run the medium settings.<br><br>From there, stepping up to the high, very high, and cinematic presets only shows relatively minor changes, at least in the still images. One thing that&apos;s not immediately obvious is how much shimmering and blobbing in and out of higher resolution assets there is on the shadows, even at maximum quality. You have to experience the game in motion before you can see how distracting this can be. That alone is enough to make us want to use the full RT option, which basically totally fixes the shadow issues.<br><br>Except, full RT with the low quality settings is a case of giving and taking away. The shadows look more stable and much better overall, but the lack of proper reflections means all the water surfaces look pretty awful — the water is basically worse looking than the low global preset using Lumen. Given the choice between shadow issues and water/reflection issues, and also factoring in the performance drop, it&apos;s pretty easy to make the case for sticking to traditional rasterization (or at least software lighting and shadows via Lumen) methods.<br><br>Using the medium setting for full RT significantly improves the look of water, but even then it&apos;s still pretty blurry due to the use of half-resolution reflections. You also don&apos;t get the RT caustics or the particle reflections. However, if you look at the drop in performance — the RTX 4080 Super goes from the mid-40s to the low 30s with the very high RT setting — you might be willing to live with the blurriness.</p><div ><table><caption>RTX 4080 Super 4K DLSS3 Quality Benchmarks</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " >Setting</th><th  >Avg FPS</th><th  >vs. Cinematic</th><th  >Speedup</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " >Cinematic</td><td  >56</td><td  >—</td><td  >1.00X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Very High</td><td  >66</td><td  >18%</td><td  >1.18X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >High</td><td  >88</td><td  >57%</td><td  >1.57X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Medium</td><td  >106</td><td  >89%</td><td  >1.89X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Low</td><td  >131</td><td  >134%</td><td  >2.34X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >High + RT Low</td><td  >55</td><td  >-2%</td><td  >0.98X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >High + RT Med</td><td  >53</td><td  >-5%</td><td  >0.95X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >High + RT Very High</td><td  >39</td><td  >-30%</td><td  >0.70X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Cine + RT Low</td><td  >45</td><td  >-20%</td><td  >0.80X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Cine + RT Med</td><td  >44</td><td  >-21%</td><td  >0.79X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Cine + RT Very High</td><td  >33</td><td  >-41%</td><td  >0.59X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >High + RT VH + FG</td><td  >61</td><td  >9%</td><td  >1.09X</td></tr></tbody></table></div><div ><table><caption>RX 7900 XTX 4K FSR3 Quality Benchmarks</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " >Setting</th><th  >Avg FPS</th><th  >vs. Cinematic</th><th  >Speedup</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " >Cinematic</td><td  >49</td><td  >—</td><td  >1.00X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Very High</td><td  >58</td><td  >18%</td><td  >1.18X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >High</td><td  >80</td><td  >63%</td><td  >1.63X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Medium</td><td  >101</td><td  >106%</td><td  >2.06X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Low</td><td  >130</td><td  >165%</td><td  >2.65X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >High + RT Low</td><td  >20</td><td  >-59%</td><td  >0.41X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >High + RT Med</td><td  >19</td><td  >-61%</td><td  >0.39X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >High + RT Very High</td><td  >10</td><td  >-80%</td><td  >0.20X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Cine + RT Low</td><td  >17</td><td  >-65%</td><td  >0.35X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Cine + RT Med</td><td  >16</td><td  >-67%</td><td  >0.33X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Cine + RT Very High</td><td  >9</td><td  >-82%</td><td  >0.18X</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >High + RT VH + FG</td><td  >20</td><td  >-59%</td><td  >0.41X</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Here&apos;s a different look at performance, using 4K with 67% scaling with all the presets, including both high and cinematic combined with the three ray tracing settings. We have results for the RTX 4080 Super and RX 7900 XTX, showing relative performance compared to the cinematic preset without full RT.<br><br>On the 4080 Super, baseline cinematic performance lands at 56 fps — definitely playable but not perfectly smooth. The very high preset boosts performance by 18%, breaking the 60 fps threshold, while the high preset yields a 57% improvement and gets the GPU to a solid 88 fps. Medium runs 89% faster than cinematic, and finally the low preset gives a 2.34X speedup and gets the GPU past the 120 fps mark.<br><br>Turning on full RT drops performance, but not by that much if you run with the high settings. High with full RT set to low basically performs the same as the cinematic setting, while high with medium RT only runs 5% slower. High with maxed out RT drops performance by 30%. Using cinematic with RT shows larger drops of 20%, 21%, and 41%. One final option is the high preset with max RT, and also with frame generation enabled, where the 4080 Super manages a respectable 61 fps (that still feels like half that speed).<br><br>AMD&apos;s RX 7900 XTX shows relatively similar scaling at first when looking at the rasterization results, though it picks up speed as the quality settings decrease. Baseline 4K cinematic performance is 49 fps, and stepping down through the presets shows relative performance improve by 18% with very high — the same improvement we saw on the 4080 Super. But then it gets 63% faster at high, 106% for medium, and a 2.65X speedup at minimum (low) settings. It&apos;s interesting that AMD&apos;s GPU seems to benefit more from lower settings than the Nvidia GPU, but then look what happens when we turn on the full RT modes.<br><br>The high preset with RT low causes a 59% drop in performance compared to the baseline cinematic score. Ouch! RT medium causes a 61% reduction, and the maximum RT setting slashes performance by 80% — as in, the 7900 XTX runs one fifth as fast as the cinematic baseline. The GPU goes from being at least reasonably playable with maxed out non-RT settings to being completely inadequate. Bumping to the cinematic preset with the RT modes shows even larger deltas: Performance drops by 65%, 67%, and 82% with the low, medium, and very high full RT modes. And with frame generation, using the high plus RT very high option, you can get back to 20 fps.<br><br>Compared to Nvidia&apos;s at least somewhat similar performing RTX 4080 Super, AMD&apos;s fastest GPU struggles badly with all the full RT modes. We&apos;ve seen before that Nvidia&apos;s RT hardware tends to perform much better, and larger numbers of rays (or RT effects) widen the gap, but it&apos;s hard to say precisely why games with full RT, aka path tracing, fall flat on their face. Is it truly just a hardware problem, or is there a lack of software optimizations also playing a role?</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Fe5VMhMbeRNaqPxsKsU4Ji.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>High preset plus full RT very high<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/whfLWoSuRbNnEnSNje8Xyi.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>High preset plus full RT medium<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZpF8Y6953VpiEwQkbKQaqg.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>High preset plus full RT low<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZJ98E5mWw97atzAJvf34Wh.jpg" alt="Black Myth: Wukong image quality comparisons" /><figcaption>High preset without full RT<small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Here&apos;s perhaps a better look at image quality, or at least a scene with a waterfall (not captured from a video) that shows off the ray tracing potential. The full RT at max settings looks really nice, and the caustics reflecting from the water all animate as you move around. Dropping to the medium full RT setting with half resolution reflections looks okay but not nearly as impressive, while the low RT setting looks worse than the Lumen for rendering the water (in my opinion at least).<br><br>Regardless of how it runs, it really feels like the ray tracing options in Black Myth Wukong are something where you&apos;ll want to either go whole hog or else leave RT off. The problem is that the very high RT setting needs an equally high-end GPU — from Nvidia. Basically, you&apos;re looking at an RTX 3080 or RTX 4070 or above just to manage 1080p with quality mode upscaling and maxed out RT settings, and that won&apos;t even hit a steady 60 fps; AMD&apos;s top GPU can&apos;t even manage a consistent 30 fps.<br><br>Needless to say, frame generation at such low base framerates feels very much like a placebo, and we wholly discount the claimed performance gains that Nvidia might show when using framegen. 60 fps with framegen is effectively running at 30 fps for user input and doubling that value, so when there&apos;s a hiccup and the generated framerate drops to 40 fps, that means the user feels it as big drop to 20 fps, and anything below 30 fps registers as a major stutter. Also, we&apos;ve seen frame generation, both DLSS and FSR, start glitching out if performance is too low, as the differences between the rendered frames can become too great. 50–60 fps with frame generation in Black Myth Wukong is generally playable, but then so is 25–30 fps without framegen; it&apos;s just not a <em>great</em> experience.<br><br>So, for current AMD GPUs, we suggest forgetting about the full RT options, until or unless driver and/or game updates improve the situation. Full RT on the very high setting just isn&apos;t viable on any RDNA 3 hardware, never mind RDNA 2. Or at least, the way full RT is done in Black Myth Wukong isn&apos;t viable on AMD, though there are probably ways of doing full RT that would run better on AMD&apos;s hardware. Even 1080p with upscaling drops below 30 fps on the 7900 XTX when using the very high RT setting with the cinematic preset, so even a drop to the high preset with full RT would probably only just manage 30 fps.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vYWqxcU4MkWE6wAYqvsNcP.jpg" alt="Black Myth Wukong screenshots" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pi5hKqmjE3iBxY7gdSAyiQ.jpg" alt="Black Myth Wukong screenshots" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pcxtQwfR5aXhhVdyvbkqqP.jpg" alt="Black Myth Wukong screenshots" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uLsZsuJ858TDCzqjYtxQPP.jpg" alt="Black Myth Wukong screenshots" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6wjp5rJykKiTahpVqMBk6Q.jpg" alt="Black Myth Wukong screenshots" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/f47Kb3BbWPHjL22NtA29MQ.jpg" alt="Black Myth Wukong screenshots" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Game Science</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-black-myth-wukong-closing-thoughts"><span>Black Myth Wukong closing thoughts</span></h3><p>As a game, Black Myth Wukong looks great, but higher settings absolutely require a capable graphics card. 1080p medium with upscaling runs well enough on lower spec GPUs, easily breaking 60 fps on an RX 6650 XT, but the cinematic "ultra" settings cause a massive spike in requirements, dropping performance by more than half. The medium to high presets should be more than sufficient if you&apos;re not too worried about missing out on a few visual extras.<br><br>Full ray tracing at higher settings, which is what we really want from full RT, basically requires an Nvidia GPU. AMD&apos;s RX 7900 XTX managed just over 60 fps with our medium + low RT testing, but then water doesn&apos;t look as good as the standard Lumen rendering. Performance dropped to just 28 fps with maxed out RT settings, however, which isn&apos;t really playable in our book. The competing RTX 4080 Super more than doubled that and remained fully playable at 1440p, and even 4K was okay.<br><br>What&apos;s not clear is how much of the poor performance for the full RT mode on non-Nvidia cards stems from those GPUs&apos; lack of ray tracing prowess, and how much of it is due to the game being heavily optimized for Nvidia&apos;s brand of RT hardware. Full path tracing, if we want to use Nvidia&apos;s term for it, will always be extremely demanding, and all indications are that it&apos;s mostly only viable on lighter games like <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/minecraft-rtx-gpus-benchmarked">Minecraft RTX</a> or on a very high-end RTX 30- or 40-series GPU. Could the game be better optimized to run on AMD&apos;s brand of RT hardware? Almost certainly. However, it&apos;s probably a case of double-digit percentage gains rather than a doubling or tripling in performance to close the gap with Nvidia&apos;s GPUs.<br><br>We didn’t perform CPU testing, but we may add the game to our CPU test suite (sans ray tracing) in the future. The system requirements suggest the game doesn&apos;t really need more than a 6-core CPU, maybe 8-core at the top, as nothing above a Core i7-9700 or Ryzen 5 5500 is listed. The GPU recommendations are much higher, as you&apos;d expect from the performance we&apos;ve shown here.<br><br>Reviews of Black Myth Wukong have been very positive, and its blend of quirky and visually interesting bosses and other enemies helps it stand out from the crowd. The Chinese mythology can be interesting as well. It&apos;s a Souls-like game, though at least so far I wouldn&apos;t rate it as being as difficult as any of the Dark Souls games. (To be fair, I haven&apos;t progressed that far in the story, so maybe the difficulty picks up later.)<br><br>After all of this initial testing, as usual our best advice is to not get too caught up in chasing the highest graphics settings if you don&apos;t have a top-tier GPU. Medium to high, without full ray tracing, should be within reach of most decent gaming PCs, and extra visual pizazz doesn&apos;t make for an inherently better gaming experience. Still, if you have a high-end RTX 40-series GPU, the full RT experience with a particle reflection system and caustics can look quite impressive in the many areas of the game where you see it in action.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Best 4K Gaming Monitors for PC 2025: 144Hz, Curved and More ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-4k-gaming-monitors-pc-144hz,6023.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ These are the best 4K gaming monitors available in 2025, including 144Hz, curved and HDR options. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">TjFQQBJdBf6iU2jqpAoMB9</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GxZT2uuF6pPmjtWCkbweBQ-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jul 2024 12:01:29 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Fri, 26 Jun 2026 00:24:59 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Gaming Monitors]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Monitors]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Christian Eberle ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/re5mon2UKaSypkGhXruLRL.png ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Christian began his obsession with tech when he built his first PC in 1991, a 286 running DOS 3.0 at a blazing 12MHz. In 2006, he undertook training from the Imaging Science Foundation in video calibration and testing and thus started a passion for precise imaging that persists to this day. He is also a professional musician with a degree from the New England Conservatory as a classical bassoonist which he used to good effect as a performer with the West Point Army Band from 1987 to 2013. He enjoys watching movies and listening to high-end audio in his custom-built home theater and can be seen riding trails near his home on a race-ready ICE VTX recumbent trike. Christian enjoys the endless summer in Florida where he lives with his wife and Chihuahua and plays with orchestras around the state.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GxZT2uuF6pPmjtWCkbweBQ-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Tom&#039;s Hardware]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Best 4K Gaming Monitors]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Best 4K Gaming Monitors]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Best 4K Gaming Monitors]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GxZT2uuF6pPmjtWCkbweBQ-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">Best 4K Gaming Monitors 2025</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="GxZT2uuF6pPmjtWCkbweBQ" name="Best 4K Gaming Monitor Cover.jpg" caption="" alt="Best 4K Gaming Monitors" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GxZT2uuF6pPmjtWCkbweBQ.jpg" mos="" link="" align="" fullscreen="" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pinterest-pin-exclude"></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=""><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p class="fancy-box__body-text"><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="#section-the-quick-list"><strong>The list in brief</strong></a><br>1. <a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="#section-best-4k-gaming-monitor">Best Overall</a><br>2. <a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="#section-best-oled-4k-gaming-monitor">Best OLED</a><br>3. <a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="#section-best-premium-4k-gaming-monitor">Best Premium</a><br>4. <a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="#section-best-budget-4k-gaming-monitor">Best Budget</a><br>5. <a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="#section-best-4k-gaming-monitor-for-consoles">Best for Consoles</a><br>6. <a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="#section-best-monitor-for-gaming-and-tv">Best for Gaming and TV</a><br>7. <a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="#section-quick-shopping-tips">Shopping Tips</a></p></div></div><p>As mainstream graphics cards become more powerful, it's not surprising that PC gamers are increasingly interested in 4K monitors. A panel packing 8.3 million pixels (3840 x 2160) makes your favorite games look sharp and realistic. And we can't forget that the added resolution also comes in handy for productivity tasks. However, that 4K resolution requires a graphics card capable of delivering high enough frame rates to make games playable.</p><p>In addition to being one of the most popular resolutions among the best gaming monitors, 4K also allows for larger displays while retaining sharpness. Thanks to the abundance of pixels, you can stretch your screen size well past 30 inches without making them so large they are visible.</p><p>However, that image quality can often come at a steep price. Anyone looking for a<a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/4k-definition,37642.html"> <u>4K</u></a> monitor knows they're not cheap. Yes, 4K is about high-res gaming (and other media), but you'll still need solid gaming specs, like a 120 Hz-plus refresh rate, low response time, and your choice of Adaptive-Sync (Nvidia G-Sync or AMD FreeSync, depending on your system's graphics card). And you can't forget the cost of the powerful graphics card you'll need to game properly in 4K. See our<a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gaming-monitors,4533.html"> <u>Best Gaming Monitors</u></a> page for lower-resolution recommendations if you're not ready to fully embrace 4K.</p><p>Our top overall pick is the<a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/monitors/gaming-monitors/asus-rog-swift-pg27ucdm-4k-240-hz-qd-oled-gaming-monitor-review"> <u>Asus ROG Swift PG27UCDM</u></a>, a 27-inch monitor capable of 240 Hz at 4K resolution. However, it's not the only standout 4K monitor available today; let's look at the other contenders for the enviable crown.</p><h2 id="prime-day-exceptional-4k-gaming-monitor-deal">Prime Day Exceptional 4K Gaming Monitor Deal </h2><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="3e1221b3-2dca-45aa-8af7-72e004e57229" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="The Acer Nitro VG270K is a value-priced 27-inch dual-mode gaming monitor that can operate at 160 Hz at 4K or 320 Hz at 1080p." data-dimension48="The Acer Nitro VG270K is a value-priced 27-inch dual-mode gaming monitor that can operate at 160 Hz at 4K or 320 Hz at 1080p." data-dimension25="$208.99" href="https://www.amazon.com/Monitor-FreeSync-Premium-VG270K-V4bmiipx/dp/B0F765XFX8/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1500px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:96.80%;"><img id="FM4bGg3m8UEk9xvdnnHiHd" name="81X-kSNVyzL._AC_SL1500_" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FM4bGg3m8UEk9xvdnnHiHd.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1500" height="1452" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p>The Acer Nitro VG270K is a value-priced 27-inch dual-mode gaming monitor that can operate at 160 Hz at 4K or 320 Hz at 1080p.<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/Monitor-FreeSync-Premium-VG270K-V4bmiipx/dp/B0F765XFX8/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="3e1221b3-2dca-45aa-8af7-72e004e57229" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="The Acer Nitro VG270K is a value-priced 27-inch dual-mode gaming monitor that can operate at 160 Hz at 4K or 320 Hz at 1080p." data-dimension48="The Acer Nitro VG270K is a value-priced 27-inch dual-mode gaming monitor that can operate at 160 Hz at 4K or 320 Hz at 1080p." data-dimension25="$208.99">View Deal</a></p></div><p><em>Here is a standout deal from the Prime Day event, which is currently taking place. Our list of best overall picks continues below.</em></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-the-quick-list"><span>The Quick List</span></h3>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="866384d9-06a6-44c0-9cda-aa1a75ed9c80">            <a href="#section-best-4k-gaming-monitor" data-model-name="Asus ROG Swift PG32UCDM3" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:86.96%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ruP4GacGkFDrYAGZohcZDZ.png" alt="Asus ROG Swift PG32UCDM3"><span class='featured__label hero__label'>Best Overall</span></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">1. Asus ROG Swift PG32UCDM3</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p><p><em><strong>Best 4K Gaming Monitor</strong></em><br><br>Asus has a winner on its hands with the ROG Swift PG32UCDM3. It combines great looks with excellent performance and video processing. Even better, the QD-OLED panel results in image quality that IPS and VA panels just can’t match, along with a mainstream 32-inch panel size.</p><p><a href="#section-best-4k-gaming-monitor"><strong>Read more below</strong></a></p></p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="16782bc5-9e5f-4270-a856-08aed6c00fd2">            <a href="#section-best-oled-4k-gaming-monitor" data-model-name="Dell S3225QC" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:86.96%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EXkfvKLABLHqaCvUtAuQMh.jpg" alt="Dell S3225QC"><span class='featured__label hero__label'>Best 4K OLED</span></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">2. Dell S3225QC </div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p><p><em><strong>Best 4K OLED Gaming Monitor </strong></em><br><br>The Dell S3225QC carries a price tag of $699, which makes it a great value offering. Not only do you get rich and accurate colors, but it also features an excellent 25-watt speaker system and premium build quality.</p><p><a href="#section-best-oled-4k-gaming-monitor"><strong>Read more below</strong></a></p></p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="874b88d4-e8cf-4f9a-b17b-57358f3ce315">            <a href="#section-best-premium-4k-gaming-monitor" data-model-name="ROG Swift OLED PG32UCDP" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:86.96%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ajF636LcA7MFcJMvnwVYJ8.jpg" alt="ROG Swift OLED PG32UCDP"><span class='featured__label hero__label'>Best Premium</span></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">3. Asus ROG Swift OLED PG32UCDP</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p><p><em><strong>Best Premium 4K Gaming Monitor</strong></em><br><br>The Asus ROG Swift OLED PG32UCDP is another dual-mode gaming monitor on our list, although this one is decidedly more premium. This OLED panel can operate at 240Hz at 4K or 480Hz at 1080p, making it one of the best-performing 4K options for gamers.</p><p><a href="#section-best-premium-4k-gaming-monitor"><strong>Read more below</strong></a></p></p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><div class="collapsible-block-start"></div><div class="collapsible-block-title"show-more"><p>Show More ⬇</p></div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="d29a47b7-82d7-4c6b-800e-c91c2b1978f0">            <a href="#section-best-budget-4k-gaming-monitor" data-model-name="TUF Gaming VG289Q" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:86.96%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VQJPFaP8QYSnMFGqCZvJ2k.jpg" alt="Asus ROG Strix XG27UCS"><span class='featured__label hero__label'>Best Budget</span></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">4. Asus ROG Strix XG27UCS</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p><p><em><strong>Best Budget 4K Gaming Monitor</strong></em><br><br>The Asus ROG Strix XG27UCS has a street price of well under $500 and delivers solid performance, featuring a 160 Hz refresh rate, low response times, and accurate color out of the box.</p><p><a href="#section-best-budget-4k-gaming-monitor"><strong>Read more below</strong></a></p></p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="7f21577b-028e-4e43-bc7e-05868f814f06">            <a href="#section-best-4k-gaming-monitor-for-consoles" data-model-name="Alienware 32 4K QD-OLED Gaming Monitor (AW3225QF)" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:86.96%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Mx7f57TTozGV672B8BgFtb.jpg" alt="Alienware AW3225QF"><span class='featured__label hero__label'>Best for Consoles</span></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">5. Alienware AW3225QF</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p><p><em><strong>Best 4K Gaming Monitor for Consoles</strong></em></p><p>The Alienware AW3225QF has a 240Hz refresh rate, 4K resolution, Dolby Vision support, and a 32-inch QD-OLED panel. The monitor bathes you in inky blacks and brilliant colors, which is par for the course for OLED panels, and features a large color gamut. </p><p><a href="#section-best-4k-gaming-monitor-for-consoles"><strong>Read more below</strong></a></p></p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="4e6b2561-cd14-4703-885b-f967483c57f1">            <a href="#section-best-monitor-for-gaming-and-tv" data-model-name="Samsung M9 M90SF" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:86.96%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dTSdssXG4ZJ6kdLAwTPWqP.jpg" alt="Samsung M9 M90SF"><span class='featured__label hero__label'>Best for Gaming and TV</span></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">6. Samsung M9 M90SF</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p><p><em><strong>Best Monitor for Gaming and TV</strong></em></p><p>Samsung’s M9 M90SF offers an all-in-one solution that brings a 32-inch 4K QD-OLED panel with a 165 Hz refresh rate for gamers, and a full suite of streaming apps for people who want to kick back on the couch and veg out on TV shows and movies.</p><p><a href="#section-best-monitor-for-gaming-and-tv"><strong>Read more below</strong></a></p></p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><div class="collapsible-block-end"></div><h2 id="best-4k-gaming-monitors-you-can-buy-today">Best 4K Gaming Monitors You Can Buy Today</h2><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-best-4k-gaming-monitor"><span>Best 4K Gaming Monitor</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2560px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.19%;"><img id="Ag7JkMe8ApNtFFP7Ce8fcR" name="Asus ROG Swift PG32UCDM3 hero image" alt="Asus ROG Swift PG32UCDM3" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ag7JkMe8ApNtFFP7Ce8fcR.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="2560" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="1-asus-rog-swift-pg32ucdm3"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/monitors/gaming-monitors/asus-rog-swift-pg32ucdm3-32-inch-240-hz-qd-oled-gaming-monitor-review">1. Asus ROG Swift PG32UCDM3</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star half"></span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Best 4K Gaming Monitor</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>Screen Size & Aspect Ratio: </strong>32 inches / 16:9 | <strong>Resolution: </strong>QD-OLED | <strong>Panel Type: </strong>240 Hz | <strong>Refresh Rate: </strong>240 Hz | <strong>Response Time (GTG): </strong>0.03 ms | <strong>Adaptive-Sync: </strong>AMD FreeSync and Nvidia G-Sync</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Stunning image for HDR and SDR</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Dolby Vision support</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Brighter than many others in SDR mode</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">BlackShield film improves ambient light management</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Super quick with smooth motion and instant response</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Premium build quality</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">No internal speakers</div></div><p>The Asus ROG Swift PG32UCDM3 ticks all the right boxes out of the gate: it has a 32-inch 4K QD-OLED panel and a comfortably fast 240 Hz refresh rate. It supports both flavors of ActiveSync and ELMB and is even DisplayHDR 500-certified.</p><p>Sure, it’s fine to get the basics right, but Asus goes above and beyond with the ROG Swift PG32UCDM3. It supports DisplayPort 2.1a, giving you full compliance with the latest GeForce RTX 50 Series and Radeon RX graphics cards, and our testing showed it covers 107 percent of DCI-P3.</p><p>And although most people aren’t pawing at their gaming monitors, the ROG Swift PG32UCDM3 employs what Asus calls a BlackShield. Not only does the BlackShield offer additional scratch protection (perhaps you have a rogue cat), but it also does an even better job of dealing with ambient light and mitigating reflections. It also helps to make blacks really look black.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:989px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:76.54%;"><img id="2WvUcrqaqPasaKRjVrzuVS" name="01 maxwhite" alt="Asus ROG Swift PG32UCDM3" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2WvUcrqaqPasaKRjVrzuVS.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="989" height="757" attribution="" endorsement="" class="inline"></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>“While a 330 or 500 Hz OLED is cool, it won’t do much for gaming besides drop input lag by a few milliseconds,” wrote our monitors reviewer, Christian Eberle. “And the PG32UCDM3 managed 18ms in my test, making it one of the quickest 4K screens I’ve reviewed. And if you spring for one in hopes of upgrading your PC after the fact, it has ELMB for smooth operation at 120 Hz.”</p><p>The ROG Swift PG32UCDM3 doesn’t come cheap, with a street price of $1,449. However, it is loaded to the gills with features and has the performance to back up its price tag.</p><p><strong>More:</strong> <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/monitors/gaming-monitors/asus-rog-swift-pg32ucdm3-32-inch-240-hz-qd-oled-gaming-monitor-review">Asus ROG Swift PG32UCDM3 review</a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-best-oled-4k-gaming-monitor"><span>Best OLED 4K Gaming Monitor</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1200px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.83%;"><img id="CNYJwGRKFdVF7zfAATEbTd" name="hero" alt="Dell S3225QC" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CNYJwGRKFdVF7zfAATEbTd.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1200" height="514" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CNYJwGRKFdVF7zfAATEbTd.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="2-dell-s3225qc"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/monitors/gaming-monitors/dell-s3225qc-32-inch-4k-qd-oled-monitor-review">2. Dell S3225QC</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star half"></span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Best 4K OLED Gaming Monitor</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>Screen Size & Aspect Ratio: </strong>32 inches / 16:9 | <strong>Resolution: </strong>3840 x 2160 | <strong>Panel Type: </strong>OLED | <strong>Refresh Rate: </strong>120 Hz | <strong>Response Time (GTG): </strong>0.03ms | <strong>Adaptive-Sync: </strong>AMD FreeSync and Nvidia G-Sync</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Stunning image with tremendous contrast and saturated color</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Accurate out of the box</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Superb sound quality with spatial audio feature</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Premium styling and build quality</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Three USB-C ports</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Only 120 Hz</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">No gamma presets</div></div><p>When OLED monitors first hit the scene, pricing was exorbitant. However, over the years, pricing has become more reasonable, albeit not low enough to displace mainstream IPS and VA monitors. However, Dell is making a strong play for value in the 4K OLED gaming monitor market with the S3225QC. This 32-inch 4K monitor may not have the fastest response times or refresh rates, but it strikes a strong balance between image quality and color accuracy.</p><p>And better yet, the S3225QC carries an MSRP of $699, making it one of the cheaper 4K OLED monitor offerings out there for gamers. The 120 Hz refresh rate might seem quaint compared to some of the 160 Hz or 240 Hz offerings also on this list, but those monitors can cost an additional $200 to $500. Besides, many would love the higher density and rich color afforded by an OLED monitor, but don’t have a graphics card capable of sustained 120+ FPS at 4K resolution.</p><p>In its favor, the S3225QC brings full support for Nvidia G-Sync and AMD FreeSync technologies, supports HDR10 and Dolby Vision, and features exceptional color accuracy straight out of the box. </p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:989px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.62%;"><img id="Q6CAu58KBUvBoYKAdYbkDA" name="16 bfu" alt="Dell S3225QC" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Q6CAu58KBUvBoYKAdYbkDA.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="989" height="738" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>We also found the build quality and ergonomics of the S3225QC to be fantastic. We've always spoken highly of the quality that Dell imparts with its monitors, and the S3225QC is no exception. The 22-pound monitor has a beefy base that firmly supports the display without wobbling. The monitor also adjusts for tilt, swivel, and height without any play between positions.</p><p>Another standout feature of the S3225QC is its integrated speaker system. We also think of speakers on a gaming monitor as being an afterthought, but Dell includes five 5-watt speakers on the S3225QC affixed behind a fabric grill.</p><p>"The spatial audio feature is a real thing, and I was immediately struck by the expansive sound stage," wrote our Christian Eberle. "Though it works best with content mastered in Dolby Atmos, it had a positive impact on the stereo feed from games and YouTube videos. The bass was so present, it seemed a little overblown at first, but within a few minutes, I realized I was hearing the full spectrum of sound, which is a rarity from a computer monitor."</p><p>With its $699 price tag, the S3225QC is an excellent bargain on this list of 4K gaming monitors. If you can make do with the 120 Hz refresh rate, you’ll be more than happy with what this monitor offers.</p><p><strong>More:</strong> <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/monitors/gaming-monitors/dell-s3225qc-32-inch-4k-qd-oled-monitor-review"><u>Dell S3225QC 32-inch 4K QD-OLED Monitor Review</u></a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-best-premium-4k-gaming-monitor"><span>Best Premium 4K Gaming Monitor</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="M2nxkCbomVNoZnsCFKuGH3" name="Asus ROG Swift PG32UCDP - cover.jpg" alt="Asus ROG Swift OLED PG32UCDP" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/M2nxkCbomVNoZnsCFKuGH3.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1280" height="720" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="3-asus-rog-swift-oled-pg32ucdp"><span class="title__text">3. Asus ROG Swift OLED PG32UCDP</span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Best Premium 4K Gaming Monitor</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>Screen Size & Aspect Ratio: </strong>32 inches / 16:9 | <strong>Panel Type: </strong>OLED | <strong>Refresh Rate: </strong>480 Hz / 240 Hz | <strong>Response Time (GTG): </strong>0.03ms | <strong>Adaptive-Sync: </strong>FreeSync & G-Sync Certified</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Stunning image with high brightness and saturated color</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Accurate with no need for calibration</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Flexible image adjustments</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Top-level gaming performance with options for slower systems</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">480 Hz mode has record-setting low input lag</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Slick styling and solid build quality</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">No flaws of consequence</div></div><p>The Asus ROG Swift OLED PG32UCDP is another dual-mode monitor on our list. However, whereas Alienware AW2725QF is smaller and more attractively priced, the PG32UCDP steps up to the larger and more popular 32-inch segment. More importantly, the PG32UCDP opts for an OLED panel, which pays dividends in overall responsiveness and color reproduction. </p><p>The PG32UCDP features a 1080p mode allowing the panel to refresh up to 480Hz. However, you can quickly switch to 4K mode, allowing refresh rates up to 240Hz. Of course, you also get AMD FreeSync and Nvidia G-Sync compatibility, and we witnessed consistently high frame rates without any motion blur.</p><p>As we wrote, the PG32UCDP has a premium aesthetic, which uses a combination of metal and plastic. It's a highly ergonomic design that also comes with the usual assortment of HDMI and DisplayPort connections. You even get USB hookups along with a KVM to support multiple PCs. And, of course, we can't forget the ROG logo which projects onto your desk for some added visual flair.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:989px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.52%;"><img id="v6Yj6WBFwYpGisohWDYd6h" name="17 response.png" alt="Asus ROG Swift PG32UCDP" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v6Yj6WBFwYpGisohWDYd6h.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="989" height="737" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>We found the response and total input lag to be class-competitive with other 240Hz monitors,  while its 480Hz performance was unmatched. "History is made here with the PG32UCDP’s 480 Hz scores," we said in our review. "The draw time for a full white field is 2ms, and the total lag is 11ms. These are the fastest results I’ve ever recorded for any monitor over the past 12 years. Granted, the resolution is FHD, but the smoothness here is incredible."</p><p>The PG32UCDP knocks it out of the park on so many levels, but be prepared to pay for that luxury. It currently has a street price of around $1,200.</p><p><strong>Read:</strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/monitors/gaming-monitors/asus-rog-swift-oled-pg32ucdp-review"><strong> </strong><u>Asus ROG Swift OLED PG32UCDP Monitor Review</u></a> </p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-best-4k-gaming-monitor-value"><span>Best 4K Gaming Monitor Value</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.81%;"><img id="E8mTMfXjWy4PHP5QKaHiuC" name="Asus ROG Strix XG27UCS hero.png" alt="Asus ROG Strix XG27UCS cover" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/E8mTMfXjWy4PHP5QKaHiuC.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1280" height="548" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/E8mTMfXjWy4PHP5QKaHiuC.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="caption-text">A solid 4K gaming monitor doesn't have to cost a fortune.  </span><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="4-asus-rog-strix-xg27ucs"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/monitors/gaming-monitors/asus-rog-strix-xg27ucs-4k-gaming-monitor-review">4. Asus ROG Strix XG27UCS</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Best 4K Gaming Monitor Value</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>Screen Size & Aspect Ratio: </strong>27 inches, 16:9 | <strong>Panel Type: </strong>IPS | <strong>Refresh Rate: </strong>160 Hz | <strong>Response Time (GTG): </strong>1ms | <strong>Adaptive-Sync: </strong>AMD FreeSync and Nvidia G-Sync</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Sharp image with very high pixel density</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Pro-level color accuracy out of the box</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Premium video processing</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Effective backlight strobe that works with Adaptive-Sync</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Terrific value</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Mediocre contrast</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">No speakers or USB ports</div></div><p>With the monitor industry quickly transitioning to OLED panels that offer ultra-fast response, excellent contrast, and vibrant colors, it’s often easy to lose sight of more value-conscious offerings that appeal to a larger audience.</p><p><br>Such is the case with the Asus ROG Strix XG27UCS, which features an IPS panel and a 4K resolution. While many 4K OLED monitors can cost upwards of $800, the XG27UCS carries a sub-$500 street price.</p><p>It's impossible to be all things to all people, but the XG27UCS comes close to hitting that mark. The XG27UCS is a 27-inch monitor, meaning that it should be small enough not to overpower smaller desks. It also features a 4K resolution, providing a dense 163 pixels per inch, compared to the 138 ppi found on 32-inch 4K panels.</p><p><br><br></p><p>With its lower price point, you can’t expect to bounce up against the 240 Hz refresh rate limit. Instead, the XG27UCS is limited to 160 Hz. But you do get excellent color accuracy without additional calibration and very sharp image quality, thanks to the high pixel density. Asus has also managed to incorporate a backlight strobe that can be enabled simultaneously with Adaptive-Sync (AMD FreeSync and Nvidia G-Sync are supported).</p><p>To reach the lower price point, you won’t find superfluous details like RGB lighting or outrageous design elements. On a more functional level, there are no speakers or USB ports, which may be something you would want in a gaming monitor. </p><p>The XG27UCS was among the best in its class in terms of response time, at 6 ms. Although 6 ms should be sufficient to quell most motion blur, the monitor also employs a comprehensive overdrive to not only tackle blur but also any stray artifacts.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:989px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.52%;"><img id="s9gycggsWVBbRzMciNqK66" name="17 response.png" alt="Asus ROG Strix XG27UCS" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/s9gycggsWVBbRzMciNqK66.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="989" height="737" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Given a street price of around $470, the XG27UCS represents a remarkable bargain for gamers who don’t want to drop a few hundred bucks more on an OLED panel.</p><p><strong>More: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/monitors/gaming-monitors/asus-rog-strix-xg27ucs-4k-gaming-monitor-review"><u>Asus ROG Strix XG27UCS Gaming Monitor Review</u></a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-best-4k-gaming-monitor-for-consoles"><span>Best 4K Gaming Monitor for Consoles</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.81%;"><img id="VxLgPKjefew7Y9ZLFAR5oF" name="Alienware AW3225QF - hero.jpg" alt="Alienware AW3225QF" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VxLgPKjefew7Y9ZLFAR5oF.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1280" height="548" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VxLgPKjefew7Y9ZLFAR5oF.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="5-alienware-aw3225qf"><span class="title__text">5. Alienware AW3225QF</span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Best 4K Gaming Monitor for Consoles</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>Screen Size & Aspect Ratio: </strong>32 inches / 16:9 | <strong>Panel Type: </strong>OLED | <strong>Resolution: </strong>4K | <strong>Refresh Rate: </strong>240Hz | <strong>Response Time (GTG): </strong>0.03ms | <strong>Adaptive-Sync: </strong>FreeSync & G-Sync Compatible </p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Stunning image with broad contrast and rich color</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Greater color volume than most other OLEDs</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Perfect motion resolution and low input lag</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Solid build quality and attractive styling</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">No flaws of consequence</div></div><p>For hardcore console gamers who want to have the best display performance available, there are plenty of options available. However, one that really stands out from the crowd is the Alienware AW3225QF, which is a 32-inch monitor with a 4K resolution, 240 Hz refresh rate, and a brilliant QD-OLED panel. If you own an Xbox Series S/X or PlayStation 5 console, it doesn’t get much better than this.</p><p>The monitor supports Dolby Vision on the Xbox Series X and ranks near the top of its class in most categories. Throw in excellent motion resolution and low input lag, and the Alienware AW3225QF is a boon not only to console gamers but also to those of us who prefer PC gaming. </p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:989px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.52%;"><img id="BFLL59pjTM3kM9XMFUSdBW" name="17 response.png" alt="Alienware AW3225QF" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BFLL59pjTM3kM9XMFUSdBW.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="989" height="737" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Although you can't make full use of the 240 Hz refresh on today's Xbox and PlayStation consoles, PC gamers are in luck. "The AW3225QF has Display Stream Compression for its DisplayPort 1.4 input and in my tests, I could sustain 240fps in 4K at <em>Doom Eternal’s</em> max detail setting," wrote our Christian Eberle. "The difference in motion resolution between this and 120fps is visibly significant. The higher frame rate also affords lower input lag. The AW3225QF manages that feat as well."</p><p>$1,200 is not a small sum by any means for a gaming mointor, but the Alienware AW3225QF is well worth the price of entry.</p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/monitors/gaming-monitors/alienware-aw3225qf-oled-4k-gaming-monitor-review"><u>Alienware AW3225QF Review</u></a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-best-monitor-for-gaming-and-tv"><span>Best Monitor for Gaming and TV</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.81%;"><img id="W5wwwKxpC3Pf8VxSRifAph" name="Samsung M9 M90SF hero" alt="Samsung M9 M90SF" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/W5wwwKxpC3Pf8VxSRifAph.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1280" height="548" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="6-samsung-m9-m90sf"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/monitors/gaming-monitors/samsung-m9-m90sf-32-inch-oled-smart-monitor-review">6. Samsung M9 M90SF</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Best Monitor for Gaming and TV</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>Screen Size & Aspect Ratio: </strong>32 inches / 16:9 | <strong>Panel Type: </strong>QD-OLED | <strong>Resolution: </strong>3840 x 2160 | <strong>Refresh Rate: </strong>165Hz | <strong>Response Time (GTG): </strong>0.03ms | <strong>Adaptive-Sync: </strong>AMD FreeSync and Nvidia G-Sync </p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Gorgeous image with deep contrast</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Accurate color modes included</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Solid gaming performance</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Intuitive streaming interface</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Premium build quality and styling</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Confusing menu system</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Accurate color requires some picking through the OSD</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">No headphone jack</div></div><p>Samsung has a long history of delivering dual-purpose monitors that are equally adept at TV duties as they are at gaming. The latest entry in that lineage is the M9 M90SF Smart Monitor. </p><p>The M9 M90SF definitely has the gaming credentials, as this is a 32-inch monitor with a 4K resolution (3840 x 2160), a brilliant QD-OLED panel, and a 165 Hz refresh rate. You'll also find support for AMD FreeSync and Nvidia G-Sync up to that maximum refresh rate. In addition, the M9 M90SF has a typical brightness of 250 nits, but can boost to 450 nits with HDR content. You'll find a variety of video inputs, including one DisplayPort 1.4, one HDMI 2.1, and one USB-C.</p><p>In our testing, the M9 M90SF showed mid-pack performance with a 6 ms response time (full black to white), and an input lag of 26 ms. This is a strong performance for a 165 Hz monitor, and was only bested by 4K monitors with a 240 Hz refresh rate.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:989px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.52%;"><img id="k6TRtwsXSFDDiRdbMxoc3J" name="17 response" alt="Samsung M9 M90SF" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/k6TRtwsXSFDDiRdbMxoc3J.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="989" height="737" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>But there's more: the M9 M90SF also functions as a full-featured streaming TV platform, including Samsung TV Plus (with free, ad-supported content) and your favorite streaming apps (Netflix, Hulu, Apple TV, YouTube, YouTube TV, Prime Video, etc.). There are also two 5-watt speakers onboard for blasting audio from your media content.</p><p>"Though the M9 has just two internal speakers, they play a wider range of frequencies than typical monitor speakers and with a wider sound stage. There isn’t a ton of bass, but there is clarity and balance," wrote our Christian Eberle. "The dialogue in TV shows like Severance was easy to understand and put just forward enough in the mix that I had no need to adjust the volume more than once."</p><p>The M9 M90SF is loaded with features and is a perfect all-in-one tool for gamers who want it all in a single monitor. However, you'll pay for that luxury with an MSRP of $1,599.</p><p><strong>More: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/monitors/gaming-monitors/samsung-m9-m90sf-32-inch-oled-smart-monitor-review"><u><strong>M9 M90SF 4K Gaming Monitor Review</strong></u></a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-other-4k-gaming-monitors-we-ve-tested"><span>Other 4K Gaming Monitors We've Tested</span></h3><p>Not every gaming monitor we tested made our best list, but here are a few we've recently tested that are still worth a second look.</p><p>*️⃣ <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Predator-FreeSync-DisplayHDR400-XB273K-V5bmiiprx/dp/B0DTMDVQ9J?th=1"><u><strong>Acer Predator XB273K V5</strong></u></a><br>The Acer Predator XB273K V5 measures 27 inches across and offers dual-mode functionality: it can run 4K resolution at 160 Hz or 1080p resolution at 320 Hz. This gives gamers the ability to pick and choose when they want to run at a crisper resolution or crank the frame rate in less demanding games. With a price tag under $400, this IPS monitor offers tremendous value for discerning gamers.</p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/monitors/gaming-monitors/acer-predator-xb273k-v5-27-inch-4k-gaming-monitor-review"><u><strong>Acer Predator XB273K V5 Review</strong></u></a></p><p>*️⃣ <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Strix-OLED-XG32UCWMG-Gaming-Monitor/dp/B0BSH3JKQB/"><u><strong>Asus ROG Strix XG32UCWMG</strong></u></a><br>The Asus ROG Strix XG32UCWMG puts its 32-inch 4K QD-OLED panel front and center, and it's a real gem. You get a glossy screen coating that helps to produce even better colors and clarity (at the expense of more reflections) and offers accurate color from the factory. The monitor can also reach 480 Hz, provided you're willing to drop to 1080p. </p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/monitors/gaming-monitors/asus-rog-strix-xg32ucwmg-4k-oled-gaming-monitor-review"><u><strong>Asus ROG Strix XG32UCWMG Review</strong></u></a></p><p>*️⃣ <a href="https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1680795-REG/benq_pd3205u_31_5_professional_ips_3840x2160.htm"><u><strong>BenQ DesignVue PD3226G</strong></u></a><br>BenQ is a well-established brand in the monitor space, consistently delivering exceptional value. That's definitely the case with the DesignVue PD3226G, a 32-inch 4K gaming monitor featuring a 144 Hz refresh rate and an IPS panel. Not only does it score top marks with its video processing and low input lag, but we also measured a maximum brightness of 458 nits in SDR mode.</p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/monitors/gaming-monitors/benq-designvue-pd3226g-144-hz-gaming-monitor-review"><u><strong>BenQ DesignVue PD3226G Review</strong></u></a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-quick-shopping-tips"><span>Quick Shopping Tips</span></h3><p>When seeking the best 4K gaming monitor for you, consider the following:</p><ul><li><strong>4K gaming requires a high-end graphics card.</strong> If you're not using a <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-review">GeForce RTX 4090</a> or <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top">Radeon RX 7900 XTX</a>, you'll want at least a <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-review">GeForce RTX 3080</a> or <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt-review">Radeon RX 6900 XT</a> to game at high-quality settings. Visit our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-buying-guide,5844.html" target="_blank">Graphics Card Buying Guide</a> for help.<br></li><li><strong>G-Sync or FreeSync? </strong>A monitor's G-Sync feature will only work with PCs using an Nvidia graphics card, and FreeSync will only run with PCs carrying an AMD card. You can technically run G-Sync on a monitor that's only FreeSync-certified, but performance may vary. We've seen negligible differences in mainstream gaming capabilities for fighting screen tearing between the two. Our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-gsync-vs-amd-freesync-test-comparison,39042.html">Nvidia G-Sync vs. AMD FreeSync</a> article offers an in-depth performance comparison.<br></li><li><strong>4K and HDR go hand-in-hand. </strong>4K displays often support HDR content for extra bright and colorful images. But for Adaptive-Sync optimized for HDR media, you'll want a G-Sync Ultimate or FreeSync Premium Pro (formerly FreeSync 2 HDR) monitor. For a noticeable upgrade from an SDR monitor, opt for at least 600 nits brightness. You can learn more from our glossary page on <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/what-is-hdr-monitor,36585.html">HDR</a> and our buying guide for picking the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/best-hdr-monitor-how-to-choose">best HDR monitor.</a></li></ul><p>For more guidance picking a monitor of any resolution--gaming or otherwise--check out our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/monitor-buying-guide,5699.html">PC Monitor Buying Guide</a> and list of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/best-picks/best-computer-monitors">Best Computer Monitors</a>. </p><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/5WCZrqMk.html" id="5WCZrqMk" title="How To Choose A Gaming Monitor" width="960" height="540" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe><p><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gaming-monitors,4533.html" target="_blank"><strong>Best Gaming Monitors</strong></a></p><p><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/display-monitor-tv-screen-test,3901.html" target="_blank"><strong>How We Test Monitors</strong></a></p><p><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/monitors" target="_blank"><strong>All Monitor Content</strong></a></p><p><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/hdmi-versus-displayport-better-for-gaming,36876.html" target="_blank"><strong>HDMI vs. DisplayPort: Which Is Better For Gaming?</strong></a></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Qualcomm hires former AMD ray tracing expert for its GPU team ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/qualcomm-hires-former-amd-ray-tracing-expert-for-its-gpu-team</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Qualcomm's Adreno GPU in its Snapdragon Elite X has failed to meet gaming expectations. The recent hire of a ray tracing expert could change that. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">pPCC8ZjgrN2d4FpM6wxTZa</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JHeXfkUtGq9irev5csBqFK-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jul 2024 15:10:23 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 10:09:45 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jeff Butts ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mu8yfvXw9Ut4an84MVDhs9.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jeff Butts began tinkering with computers in the early 1980s and worked as an IT and networking consultant for 15 years before engaging in any “formal” training. Throughout his career, he worked with and supported nearly every commonly used operating system, including Windows, OS/2, Linux, and macOS. He eventually earned a Master of Information and Computing Systems and taught university English and computer science for several years before pivoting to professional writing. He’s written and edited for such outlets as The Mac Observer, How-To Geek, Hot Hardware, groovyPost, and geekRumor. When not writing, he bounces between 3D printing projects, fiddling with Raspberry Pi and the like, and Microsoft Flight Simulator.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JHeXfkUtGq9irev5csBqFK-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Qualcomm]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JHeXfkUtGq9irev5csBqFK-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Qualcomm has added a heavy hitter to its GPU ranks. AMD’s former ray tracing expert, <a href="https://twitter.com/PixelClearr/status/1809607123946602799" target="_blank">Paritosh Kulkarni</a>, announced he’s joined Qualcomm’s team to work on DirectX 12.2 support for its Adreno GPUs. He’ll leverage his expertise in ray tracing to help develop DX12.2 features like DXR, mesh shaders, work graphs, and driver optimizations.</p><p>During his tenure at AMD, Kulkarni’s work ranged from rendering research to direct contributions to drivers for AMD’s graphics chipsets. Starting as a graphics API developer, he pivoted into ray tracing and became one of AMD’s top experts in the field. He was responsible for helping develop ProRender, the compute ray tracing API HIPRT, and other internal frameworks.</p><p>Qualcomm can likely benefit significantly from Kulkarni’s expertise. It hyped the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/qualcomm-snapdragon-elite-x-oryon-pc-cpu-specs">Snapdragon Elite X</a> as having “flawless” compatibility with Windows games, but that’s not proven to be the case. While the Snapdragon X Elite chips offer terrific AI computing power, there have been many problems with gaming on the new laptops.</p><p>Gaming has proven to be a weakness for the GPU powering the latest Copilot+ AI PC laptops. Even though the Adreno graphics are far greater than those offered by the typical Steam Deck’s APU, the less expensive device currently provides a much better gaming experience. The <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/steam-deck-valve-gaming-handheld">Steam Deck</a> list of Verified and Playable game titles includes over 14 times as many games as the official list of “Windows on Arm Ready Games.”</p><p>While the Copilot+ AI PCs can already prove powerful choices for business and productivity consumers, Qualcomm wants to target every facet of the PC market. That means the company needs to increase significantly its compatibility with the most popular (and demanding) game titles.</p><p>At least on paper, the Adreno GPU has the performance capabilities to blow existing AMD and Intel gaming laptops out of the water. However, lacking GPU driver compatibility means many popular multiplayer games crash before loading. With Kulkarni’s expertise, this may soon change for the better.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Micron says GDDR7 will provide a 30% improvement in gaming — both ray tracing and rasterization ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/micron-says-gddr7-will-provide-a-30-improvement-in-gaming-both-ray-tracing-and-rasterization</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ In a press release, Micron revealed that its GDDR7 will provide 30% greater frame rates than its older GDDR6 memory in ray tracing and rasterized video games. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">EU7FhVvZUinhPFXeUQFjNb</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/caEfbWxgFZXwc2sKRnjXw5-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2024 18:33:42 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:47:18 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Aaron Klotz) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Aaron Klotz ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aAk2saHqkgFuTCanz8LnmD.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Aaron began building computers back when he was 8 years old in the mid-2000s, and it’s been a hobby of his ever since then. With a focus on computer hardware, he became an avid member of the Tom’s Hardware forums several years later, helping people solve issues with their PCs. He is now a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware, writing about computer hardware news and more. When not busy playing or writing about computer hardware, he spends his free time playing video games like Star Citizen or Apex Legends.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/caEfbWxgFZXwc2sKRnjXw5-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Micron]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Micron GDDR7]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Micron GDDR7]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Micron GDDR7]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/caEfbWxgFZXwc2sKRnjXw5-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Micron has revealed that its next-generation GDDR7 graphics memory technology will offer a 30% performance improvement for all gamers. Discovered by <a href="https://x.com/harukaze5719/status/1807062452687016390?">Harukaze5719 on X (Twitter)</a>, The next-generation graphics memory standard is specified as having a 30% improvement in frames per second over its GDDR6 counterpart (GDDR6 and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/micron-reveals-gddr6x-details-the-future-of-memory-or-a-proprietary-dram">G6X</a>), entailing both ray tracing-focused titles and pure rasterization-only games. </p><p>Specifically, Micron is saying these changes will occur with its upcoming 32Gb/s GDDR7 modules, in comparison to its <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/micron-gddr6-dram-graphics-memory,37356.html">GDDR6</a> (non-X) 20Gb/s version, which is currently one of the fastest speeds on the market for standard GDDR6 memory. Micron neglected to share what benchmarks were run to get its 30% metric, but 30% is a huge improvement regardless, assuming these uplifts are from memory alone.</p><div class="see-more see-more--clipped"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet hawk-ignore" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">micron, 30% FPS improve28Gbps: https://t.co/hj9RtqyraN32Gbps: https://t.co/sWJAe1oDnG pic.twitter.com/lsToW4nwr9<a href="https://twitter.com/harukaze5719/status/1807062452687016390">June 29, 2024</a></p></blockquote><div class="see-more__filter"></div></div><p>There&apos;s a lot of evidence to back up Micron&apos;s statement. Micron&apos;s new GDDR7 boasts an impressive 60% bandwidth improvement over GDDR6, and it does so with 50% improved power efficiency. Response times have also been reduced by 20%, which will help sensitive workloads such as <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/microsoft-azure-machine-learning-artificial_intelligence,39239.html">machine learning</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/ai-image-generators-output-copyrighted-characters">AI image generation</a>.</p><p>The new modules are rated at a whopping 32Gb/s, which is almost 10Gb/s higher than the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/micron-gddr6x-24gbps-coming">fastest GDDR6X modules ever created</a>. With a test setup comprised of 12 Micron GDDR7 ICs connected to a 384-bit wide interface, Micron says its next-gen memory can offer more than 1.5TB/s of bandwidth. By contrast, the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-review">RTX 4090</a> with the exact same memory configuration, but with 21Gbps Micron GDDR6X modules, offers "just" 1.008 TB/s of memory bandwidth.</p><p>Micron&apos;s performance estimations are impressive and a testament to the kinds of improvements we could see in future graphics cards. But they must be taken with a grain of salt. Even though GDDR7 has massive performance implications, GPU makers such as Nvidia are inevitably going to cut the bus width of next-gen cards by a significant amount, which will handicap the full 30% performance improvement Micron is advertising for its 32Gb/s GDDR7 memory. We could see an RTX 5090 with GDDR7 and the same 384-bit bus interface as the RTX 4090, but we don&apos;t expect Nvidia to use the same memory interface down the whole <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-blackwell-rtx-50-series-gpus-everything-we-know">RTX 50 series</a> stack, as has been the case with previous generations of GPUs. AMD and Intel will likely do the same once both come to the table with GDDR7-equipped graphics cards.</p><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/what-is-gddr7-memory">GDDR7</a> is the next generation of graphics memory, succeeding GDDR6 and its more performant sibling, GDDR6X. GDDR7 will start at 28GT/s or 32GT/s on release, but plans are already underway from Micron, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/samsung-develops-worlds-first-gddr7-chip">Samsung</a>, and SK Hynix that will see the production of higher speed modules — as high as <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/gpu-boosting-gddr7-memory-coming-this-year-sk-hynix-to-launch-in-q4-matching-competitors">40 GT/s</a> in the future.</p><p>Nvidia is all but certain to be using these next-gen GDDR7 modules and is probably responsible for driving the test setup that Micron used to create its 30% performance improvement metric, using some sort of prototype RTX 50 series GPU. According to rumors and leaks, Nvidia will be the first to produce graphics cards with GDDR7 modules. AMD is expected to keep using <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-rumored-to-use-slow-18gbps-gddr6-in-rdna-4-leaker-says-team-reds-next-generation-gpus-wont-use-gddr7">older GDDR6 modules for their next-generation GPUs</a>, and probably won&apos;t transition until the RX 9000 series. Intel&apos;s next-generation GPUs are less clear, but Team Blue could go either way and utilize GDDR6 and/or GDDR7 for <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/intel-arc-battlemage-gpu-surfaces-bmg-g31-silicon-reportedly-wields-32-xe2-cores">Battlemage</a>, or wait to go to GDDR7 until its third-generation <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-battlemage-celestial-gpus-tsmc-report">Celestial</a> debut.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Basemark Breaking Limit benchmark tests ray traced gaming performance across diverse platforms — Windows, Linux, iOS, and Android ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/basemark-breaking-limit-benchmark-tests-ray-traced-gaming-performance-across-diverse-platforms-windows-linux-ios-and-android</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Basemark through GPUScore introduces a cross-platform ray tracing benchmark, Breaking Limit. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">yM8MNa4jPm7LVf6gvizkW</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2UTvj5VcCS85S2tgApUgxn-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 13 Jun 2024 14:11:59 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:55:41 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Christopher Harper ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qS2hbWnXwNUSmgyAHBQqKB.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Christopher Harper has been a successful freelance tech writer specializing in PC hardware and gaming since 2015, and ghostwrote&amp;nbsp;for various B2B clients in High School before that. Outside of work, Christopher is best known to friends and rivals as an active competitive player in various eSports (particularly fighting games and arena shooters) and a purveyor of music ranging from Jimi Hendrix to Killer Mike to the&amp;nbsp;Sonic Adventure 2&amp;nbsp;soundtrack.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2UTvj5VcCS85S2tgApUgxn-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Basemark via GPUScore.com]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                        <media:description><![CDATA[Official render from Basemark&#039;s latest Breaking Limit cross-platform RT benchmark.]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Official render from Basemark&#039;s latest Breaking Limit cross-platform RT benchmark.]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Official render from Basemark&#039;s latest Breaking Limit cross-platform RT benchmark.]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2UTvj5VcCS85S2tgApUgxn-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Those hoping for a more diverse pool of cross-platform benchmarking tools will be pleased to hear that Basemark, through its GPUScore division, has announced a new ray tracing (RT) benchmark dubbed <a href="https://www.gpuscore.com/benchmark/gpuscore/breaking-limit-coming-soon/">Breaking Limit</a>. This flexible new benchmarking software is targeted at current-gen Android and iOS mobile devices, as well as Windows and Linux computers.</p><p>Techniques tested by the new benchmark include <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-rtxgi-ray-tracing-global-illumination-at-any-frame-rate">global illumination</a> (how light sources interact with the environment and each other), ray-traced shadows and reflections, and even support for <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-fsr2-deathloop-vs-dlss">FSR 2</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-review/7">DLSS 2</a> upscaling in the "Ultra" version. Since most users playing games with RT enabled are going to also be enabling some kind of image upscaling or resolution scaling to improve performance, the inclusion of DLSS 2 and FSR 2 is nice, though we hope to see updates that add <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/intel-details-game-boosting-frame-generation-tech-that-applies-a-different-technique-extrass-uses-extrapolation-instead-of-amd-and-nvidias-approach-that-uses-interpolation">Frame Generation</a> and perhaps even <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-xess-technology-demo-and-overview">Intel XeSS</a> to the equation.</p><h2 id="gpuscore-breaking-limit-benchmark-requirements">GPUScore Breaking Limit Benchmark Requirements</h2><div ><table><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  >Mobile</td><td  >PC</td><td  >Linux</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Operating System Requirement</td><td  >Recent versions of iOS and Android</td><td  >Windows 10 or newer</td><td  >Ubuntu 20 or newer*</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Storage Space Requirement</td><td  >Unknown; Likely 2GB or smaller</td><td  >2GB</td><td  >2GB</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >RAM Requirement</td><td  >Unknown</td><td  >6GB RAM</td><td  >8GB RAM</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >GPU Requirement</td><td  >Any GPU Capable of Ray Tracing</td><td  >Any GPU Capable of Ray Tracing</td><td  >Any GPU Capable of Ray Tracing</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p><strong>*Since Ubuntu is based on Debian, this bench should in theory work on other Debian-based Linux distributions as well, once released.</strong></p><p>Now, while Basemark claims this to be the first "true" cross-platform ray tracing benchmark for whatever reason, it&apos;s worth noting that other cross-platform RT benchmarks do, in fact, exist. For example, <a href="https://benchmarks.ul.com/3dmark">3DMark</a>&apos;s Solar Bay benchmark is a cross-platform RT bench that uses Vulkan on Android and Windows and even supports Metal on iOS. GPUScore Breaking Limit still looks (and sounds) cool, but claiming it as the "first true cross-platform ray tracing benchmark" does feel like something of an overstatement, even if Breaking Limit is somehow more sophisticated.</p><p>Edit: Due to either author oversight or a sneaky page edit, the live page does not claim Breaking Limit to be the "first" true cross-platform RT benchmark. However, advertising as "<em>The</em> true cross-platform ray tracing benchmark", which is live at time of edit, still seems like very generous marketing for a cross-platform RT benchmark that has existing competitors.</p><p>In any case, we may or may not end up adding this Breaking Limit benchmark to our GPU benchmarking suite. </p><p>As you may know, we at Tom&apos;s Hardware take our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html">GPU benchmarks and their hierarchy</a> quite seriously — and be mindful that synthetic benchmarks like this never tell the full story. Most synthetic benchmarks are an ideal scenario compared to the pure chaos of actual <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/steam-deck-valve-hands-on">PC games</a>, after all. Though for professional workloads where CPU and GPU power pretty much scale as expected, synthetics are nice for setting expectations.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ 3DMark's Time Spy successor, Steel Nomad, makes Nvidia's RTX 4090 work hard, without ray tracing ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/3dmarks-time-spy-successor-steel-nomad-makes-nvidias-rtx-4090-work-hard-without-ray-tracing</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Steel Nomad is a new 3DMark benchmark that is replacing Time Spy after eight years. The benchmarking tool features more demanding graphics that bring the latest generation of GPUs to their knees. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">xTuTtxLuzUF6dnKBwiZdU6</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UXBX6a5PtSSPaN6XMjpfQF-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Mon, 20 May 2024 15:25:23 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:54:45 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Aaron Klotz) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Aaron Klotz ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aAk2saHqkgFuTCanz8LnmD.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Aaron began building computers back when he was 8 years old in the mid-2000s, and it’s been a hobby of his ever since then. With a focus on computer hardware, he became an avid member of the Tom’s Hardware forums several years later, helping people solve issues with their PCs. He is now a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware, writing about computer hardware news and more. When not busy playing or writing about computer hardware, he spends his free time playing video games like Star Citizen or Apex Legends.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UXBX6a5PtSSPaN6XMjpfQF-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[3DMark]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[3DMark Steel Nomad]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[3DMark Steel Nomad]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[3DMark Steel Nomad]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UXBX6a5PtSSPaN6XMjpfQF-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Steel Nomad, 3DMark&apos;s latest GPU benchmark, is the official successor of 3DMark popular Time Spy tool, which debuted eight years ago. <a href="https://www.pcgameshardware.de/3DMark-Software-122260/Specials/Steel-Nomad-Light-Benchmark-UL-Solutions-GPU-Test-Review-Hands-on-1447596/">PCGamesHardware</a> benchmarked Steel Nomad and discovered it&apos;s a worthy successor to Time Spy, making even Nvidia&apos;s <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-review">RTX 4090</a> struggle a bit.</p><p>Steel Nomad is explicitly designed to push the limits of the latest GPU hardware. 3DMark says that the newest generation of Nvidia and AMD GPU hardware is so fast that it has reached the limits of what <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/3dmark-time-spy-dx12-benchmark,32257.html">Time Spy</a> is capable of. Steel Nomad rectifies this issue by significantly increasing the GPU graphics workload.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="t9B7dWgynzsjfkXvqa9RAF" name="3dmark-steel-nomad-screenshot-on-the-edge.jpg" alt="3DMark Steel Nomad" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/t9B7dWgynzsjfkXvqa9RAF.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: 3DMark)</span></figcaption></figure><p>The new benchmark comes in two formats: a vanilla Steel Nomad version and Steel Nomad Light, a much lighter counterpart aimed at lightweight devices with integrated graphics and smartphones. The hallmark of Steel Nomad is its rasterized-only graphics, which sets it apart from 3DMark&apos;s other ray-traced benchmarks like Speed Way. This makes it an excellent tool for comparing rasterized GPU performance, which is still a legitimate performance category, even as games continue to adopt ray-tracing graphics. Many modern games still forgo RT graphics, such as Sony&apos;s latest PC port,<em> </em><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/pc-gaming/horizon-forbidden-west-pc-port-analysis-another-game-that-can-exceed-8gb-vram-use"><em>Horizon: Forbidden West</em></a><em>.</em></p><p>The fully-fledged version of Steel Nomad utilizes a hefty 4K render resolution, combined with volumetric lighting, volumetric cloud calculations, and Intel&apos;s XeGTAO ambient occlusion. According to pictures, the world in Steel Nomad appears to be incredibly large, which will put even more stress on the GPU.</p><p>It might seem silly that Steel Nomad lacks ray-tracing capabilities, but that isn&apos;t the intended role of the new benchmark. Steel Nomad is explicitly designed to benchmark rasterized GPU performance, which is the same role that Time Spy fulfilled. 3DMark has other <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/ul-releases-3dmark-solar-bay-for-cross-platform-ray-tracing-comparisons">ray-tracing-specific benchmarks</a> that address RT GPU performance benchmarking.</p><h2 id="performance">Performance</h2><p>Steel Nomad does not disappoint in its ability to bring GPUs to their knees. PCGamesHardware recorded a maximum frame rate of just 112 on Nvidia&apos;s RTX 4090 flagship, with a manual overclock of 3GHz. </p><p>Lower-end GPUs of course do much worse: The Radeon <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top">RX 7900 XTX</a> achieves just 73 FPS and Nvidia&apos;s <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-super-review">RTX 4080 Super</a> 72 FPS. Both Nvidia&apos;s <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-review">RTX 4070</a> and AMD&apos;s <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7800-xt-review">RX 7800 XT</a> achieve just 41 FPS, and both brands&apos; lowest-end current-generation products, the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/rtx-4060-vs-rx-7600-gpu-faceoff-battle-of-the-budget-mainstream-graphics-cards">RTX 4060 and RX 7600</a>, dip below 25 FPS on the benchmark.</p><p>The new Steel Nomad benchmark will officially be released tomorrow (May 21st) and will be available for free for all 3DMark users (it will be bundled in the free 3DMark Basic Edition).</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ PlayStation 5 Pro Enhanced requirements allegedly leaked — upscaled 4K at constant 60 FPS with ray tracing is the new target ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/console-gaming/playstation-5-pro-enhanced-requirements-allegedly-leaked</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Leaked PS5 Pro documents verified by Insider Gaming suggest the existence of "Trinity Enhanced" PS5 Pro titles, or more simply, PS5 Pro Enhanced titles akin to those of the PS4 Pro prior. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">vPQqoTa3YLhjhyywhPKfnW</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/S86fJafmzvVuMLhTj6vipT-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sat, 30 Mar 2024 17:00:01 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Wed, 09 Apr 2025 13:17:20 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Console Gaming]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Video Games]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Christopher Harper ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qS2hbWnXwNUSmgyAHBQqKB.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Christopher Harper has been a successful freelance tech writer specializing in PC hardware and gaming since 2015, and ghostwrote&amp;nbsp;for various B2B clients in High School before that. Outside of work, Christopher is best known to friends and rivals as an active competitive player in various eSports (particularly fighting games and arena shooters) and a purveyor of music ranging from Jimi Hendrix to Killer Mike to the&amp;nbsp;Sonic Adventure 2&amp;nbsp;soundtrack.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/S86fJafmzvVuMLhTj6vipT-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Shutterstock]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                        <media:description><![CDATA[Sony PlayStation 5]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Sony PlayStation 5]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Sony PlayStation 5]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/S86fJafmzvVuMLhTj6vipT-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Following the near-complete <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/console-gaming/further-playstation-5-pro-specs-leak-improvements-to-cpu-speed-gpu-ram-and-audio">PS5 Pro</a> specs list leak earlier this month, leaked info verified by Tom Henderson at <a href="https://insider-gaming.com/ps5-pro-enhanced-details/" target="_blank">Insider Gaming</a> points toward the specific requirements for games to receive "PS5 Pro Enhanced" labeling, codenamed "Trinity Enhanced" internally.</p><p>The ideal "Trinity Enhanced" mode is described as using <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/console-gaming/playstation-5-pro-leak-touts-a-45-performance-uplift-reliable-leaker-confirms-ps5-pro-rumors-about-4x-higher-rt-performance-and-ai-based-pssr-upscaling">PSSR</a> to upscale resolution to 4K, achieving a constant 60 FPS, and adding or increasing ray tracing effects compared to the stock PS5 version, which may or may not have RT. While specific PS5 titles are built from the ground up for RT, like <em>Spider-Man 2</em>, others skirt RT entirely while still targeting 30-60 FPS, like <em>Final Fantasy XVI —</em> so this seems ideal for those games, in particular.</p><p>However, "Trinity Enhanced" requirements seem looser than meeting all three of the above goals at once. Instead, meeting any of the below-listed requirements will give a PS5 Pro game its appropriate Trinity Enhanced/PS5 Pro Enhanced labeling.</p><h2 id="leaked-ps5-pro-quot-trinity-enhanced-quot-requirements-any">Leaked PS5 Pro "Trinity Enhanced" Requirements (any)</h2><ul><li><strong>Inclusion of "PS5 Pro Ray-tracing effects"</strong>—In other words, some titles' only enhancement on PS5 Pro will be the addition of ray-tracing effects to games that ran at specific performance targets (4K30, etc.) but didn't yet include RT. This also applies to games that already had some RT but disabled or lowered the quality of features like RT reflections on PS5.</li><li><strong>Increased target framerate versus standard PS5</strong>—This entails 30 FPS PS5 games going up to 60, 60 to Variable or 120, etc. PS5 has supported VRR since April 2022.</li><li><strong>Increased target resolution for games that run with Dynamic Resolution Scaling on PS5</strong> — Most modern console games utilize some degree of dynamic resolution scaling, especially when targeting 4K resolution or 60 FPS.</li><li><strong>Increased fixed resolution for games that already run at a fixed resolution on PS5</strong>—This enhancement entails changing the 1080p lock to 4K lock, etc. It's self-explanatory. Either of these increased target resolutions can also be met using Pro-exclusive PSSR upscaling.</li></ul><p>Let&apos;s use a specific PS5 game as an example to examine these PS5 Pro Enhanced requirements in more detail.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2466px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.24%;"><img id="dKTUkfeZ4R8PHbX7tCJWmN" name="ps5 pro trinity enhanced hero.png" alt="Official shot of existing RT on vs RT off PS5 Performance Modes for Devil May Cry 5: Special Edition on PS5." src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dKTUkfeZ4R8PHbX7tCJWmN.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="2466" height="1387" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dKTUkfeZ4R8PHbX7tCJWmN.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Capcom)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Devil May Cry 5: Special Edition was released on PS5 with various performance modes. As what was originally a PS4 game locked to 60 FPS without RT, one of the basic PlayStation 5/Special Edition enhancements was ray tracing. Ray tracing could be enabled in DMC5:SE while targeting 30 FPS at 4K or 60 FPS at 1080p. However, the game also offered to run at up to 120 FPS/120 Hz without ray-tracing with resolution scaling enabled.</p><p>With the four existing performance modes of DMC5:SE on current PS5 hardware targeting either ray tracing or high FPS, it seems evident that a "Trinity Enhanced" patch for the game would allow you to do both. Enabling RT in DMC5:SE&apos;s Variable 120 Hz Performance Mode, for example, would seem to fall perfectly in line with the PS5 Pro&apos;s established ~4X RT performance boost—though it may not consistently hit 120 FPS.</p><p>Widespread speculation from outlets like Digital Foundry points toward actual next-gen titles like <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/first-grand-theft-auto-6-trailer-drops-14-hours-early-sets-internet-ablaze">Grand Theft Auto VI</a> being unable to run at 60 FPS on the console. However, if the footage of the game we&apos;ve already seen is running with those ray-traced effects at 30 FPS on existing console hardware— as DMC5:SE is above when targeting 4K— it does seem that PS5 Pro may allow those 30 FPS RT Modes to hit 60. </p><p>On base PS5 and in PC games, real-time ray-tracing is also incredibly CPU-intensive, not simply GPU-intensive. However, console games can be optimized at an SoC level, and it seems as if the PS5 Pro&apos;s GPU may be tailor-made to offset those CPU bottlenecks otherwise introduced by real-time ray tracing on the console.</p><p>Considering the nature of these "PS5 Pro Enhanced" performance targets and the existing leaked specs, it may be too soon to rule out 60 FPS for PS5 Pro games.</p><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/dBMx1ASv.html" id="dBMx1ASv" title="How to Choose a CPU" width="960" height="540" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Diablo IV's new ray tracing update is live — Outpost: Infinity Siege also gets DLSS 3 ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/pc-gaming/diablo-ivs-new-ray-tracing-update-is-live-outpost-infinity-siege-also-gets-dlss-3</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ The long awaited ray tracing update for Diablo IV has arrived. Besides that, Nvidia touts several other games sporting DLSS 3 frame generation and/or DLSS 2 upscaling technology, including Outpost: Infinity Siege, Alone in the Dark, and Lightyear Frontier Out. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">7p6oKjudeLJXM4f6F4RLUL</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VhL67wnSvgZFrp4ogyLMkT-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Mar 2024 21:05:38 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Wed, 09 Apr 2025 13:17:32 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[PC Gaming]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Video Games]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Aaron Klotz) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Aaron Klotz ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aAk2saHqkgFuTCanz8LnmD.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Aaron began building computers back when he was 8 years old in the mid-2000s, and it’s been a hobby of his ever since then. With a focus on computer hardware, he became an avid member of the Tom’s Hardware forums several years later, helping people solve issues with their PCs. He is now a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware, writing about computer hardware news and more. When not busy playing or writing about computer hardware, he spends his free time playing video games like Star Citizen or Apex Legends.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VhL67wnSvgZFrp4ogyLMkT-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Nvidia / Blizzard]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Diablo IV with ray tracing]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Diablo IV with ray tracing]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Diablo IV with ray tracing]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VhL67wnSvgZFrp4ogyLMkT-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Nvidia would like you to know that Diablo IV&apos;s ray tracing update is finally available — in case you took a break from the game while waiting. It also announced several more games with <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reference/what-is-nvidia-dlss">DLSS 2</a> upscaling and/or <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-dlss-3-only-works-with-geforce-rtx-40-series-gpus-for-now">DLSS 3</a> frame generation technologies. These include Outpost: Infinity Siege, Alone In The Dark, and Lightyear Frontier Out.</p><div class="youtube-video" data-nosnippet ><div class="video-aspect-box"><iframe data-lazy-priority="low" data-lazy-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/Eh80iWrP95w" allowfullscreen></iframe></div></div><p>The biggest draw will likely be <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/diablo-iv-pc-settings-benchmarks-performance-system-requirements">Diablo IV</a>, which seemed to have plenty of headroom for enhanced visuals when we tested it at launch last year. It already supported DLSS 3, but now the developers have added ray-tracing effects. That should bring the fps down while enhancing the atmosphere of the game, and the new visuals include <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/ray-tracing-definition,37600.html">ray-traced</a> reflections and ray-traced shadows.<br><br>According to technical director Michael Bukowski, "Effects like lightning strikes are now reflected in pools of blood and water, dank cellars and dungeons are more foreboding with realistic soft shadows, and the open world and towns are more grounded with additional realistic shadows and reflections. We are very excited for our community to experience this new technology."<br><br>According to Nvidia benchmarks, gamers can expect up to a 3.1X performance multiplier when utilizing DLSS upscaling and frame generation together. At <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/4k-definition,37642.html">4K</a> max settings with RT enabled, Nvidia&apos;s <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-review">RTX 4090</a> achieves 144 FPS, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-super-review">RTX 4080 Super</a> 117 FPS, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-super-review">RTX 4070 Ti Super</a> 103 FPS, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-super-review-boosted-clocks-and-core-counts-for-the-same-dollar599-as-the-vanilla-4070">RTX 4070 Super</a> 91 FPS, and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-super-review-boosted-clocks-and-core-counts-for-the-same-dollar599-as-the-vanilla-4070https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-review">RTX 4070</a> 77 FPS. Nvidia neglected to tell us how well the game runs without frame generation, sadly.</p><div class="youtube-video" data-nosnippet ><div class="video-aspect-box"><iframe data-lazy-priority="low" data-lazy-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/RSjgfBEIn_A" allowfullscreen></iframe></div></div><p><a href="https://store.steampowered.com/app/1566690/Outpost_Infinity_Siege/">Outpost: Infinity Siege</a> is a new first-person shooter hybrid with base-building capabilities reminiscent of the game From The Depths. The game launched with DLSS 3 support but no ray tracing. As a result, according to Nvidia benchmarks, the game runs exceptionally well with frame generation.<br><br>Benchmarks reveal that the RTX 4090 can achieve 160 FPS at 4K max settings, 129 FPS on the RTX 4080 Super, 115 FPS on the RTX 4070 Ti Super, 101 FPS on the RTX 4070 Super, and 88 FPS on the RTX 4070.</p><div class="youtube-video" data-nosnippet ><div class="video-aspect-box"><iframe data-lazy-priority="low" data-lazy-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/6lyDlYbbqkY" allowfullscreen></iframe></div></div><p><a href="https://store.steampowered.com/app/1310410/Alone_in_the_Dark/">Alone In The Dark</a> is a reboot inspired by the cult classic horror games of the 90s. The game features actors Jodie Comer (from Free Guy) and David Harbour (from Stranger Things and Black Widow) in an environment set in the Gothic American South of the 1920s. The game arrives with DLSS 2 upscaling to boost performance on compatible GeForce RTX hardware.</p><div class="youtube-video" data-nosnippet ><div class="video-aspect-box"><iframe data-lazy-priority="low" data-lazy-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/n-UVhQqW_Rc" allowfullscreen></iframe></div></div><p>On the opposite side of the spectrum is <a href="https://store.steampowered.com/app/1677110/Lightyear_Frontier/">Lightyear Frontier</a>, a peaceful open-world farming game set on a planet at the far edge of the galaxy. In the game, you set your homestead and farm crops with futuristic robotic vehicles. Unlike most other Si-Fi games, there&apos;s no combat in this game, giving you a stress-free experience managing your abode. The game arrives with DLSS 2 and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-brings-dlaa-technology-to-the-elder-scrolls-online">DLAA</a> support, giving RTX gamers ways to improve performance or boost image quality.<br><br>Nvidia also reiterated that Horizon Forbidden West is available now with DLSS 3 support, though the PC port arrived last week. Nvidia provided benchmarks with DLSS featuring most of its <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-rtx-40-series-super-models-revealed-4070-super-coming-jan-17-at-dollar599">RTX 40 series</a> GPUs. Alternatively, you can check our own <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/pc-gaming/horizon-forbidden-west-pc-port-analysis-another-game-that-can-exceed-8gb-vram-use">tests of Horizon Forbidden West</a> where we benchmarked over two dozen Intel, AMD, and Nvidia GPUs, plus the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/steam-deck-valve-hands-on">Steam Deck</a>, to see how the game performs.<br><br>(Spoiler alert: The game performs very well on most GPUs, provided you&apos;re not trying to max out settings. Cards with 8GB or less VRAM don&apos;t particularly care for the maximum settings but should do fine at medium quality.)</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Microsoft aims to boost ray-tracing performance in VRAM-constrained scenarios — patent describes a new level of detail system for RT effects ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/microsoft-aims-to-boost-ray-tracing-performance-in-vram-constrained-scenarios-patent-describes-a-new-level-of-detail-system-for-rt-effects</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Microsoft has published a performance-optimizing patent for ray-tracing, that is designed to reduce the memory footprint of workloads via an RT level of detail system. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">RR76yGPpKCGUQqdGTkz7jc</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UwjKJJcop6AfL75ZyjHo4e-1280-80.png" type="image/png" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sun, 24 Mar 2024 16:55:51 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:42:27 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Aaron Klotz) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Aaron Klotz ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aAk2saHqkgFuTCanz8LnmD.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Aaron began building computers back when he was 8 years old in the mid-2000s, and it’s been a hobby of his ever since then. With a focus on computer hardware, he became an avid member of the Tom’s Hardware forums several years later, helping people solve issues with their PCs. He is now a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware, writing about computer hardware news and more. When not busy playing or writing about computer hardware, he spends his free time playing video games like Star Citizen or Apex Legends.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/png" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UwjKJJcop6AfL75ZyjHo4e-1280-80.png">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[YouTube - Nvidia GeForce]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Cyberpunk 2077 Ray Tracing: Overdrive Mode]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Cyberpunk 2077 Ray Tracing: Overdrive Mode]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Cyberpunk 2077 Ray Tracing: Overdrive Mode]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UwjKJJcop6AfL75ZyjHo4e-1280-80.png" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p><a href="https://patents.google.com/patent/US20240070960A1">Microsoft published a new patent</a> that describes a method to reduce the memory footprint of <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/ray-tracing-definition,37600.html">ray-tracing graphics</a>; directly addressing concerns surrounding the increasingly large memory requirements ray-tracing (and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/alan-wake-2-will-punish-your-gpu">path-tracing</a>) requires. The technology described in the patent utilizes an aggressive level of detail (LOD) philosophy to improve or reduce ray-tracing quality as needed.</p><p>The patent describes the ray-tracing pipeline as an acceleration structure that can be optimized with a level of detail system. This is achieved through a residency map corresponding to a bounding volume hierarchy of objects. The graphics processing system is then able to use this map to determine what quality level objects need to be at the appropriate time.</p><p>To de-complicate this, Microsoft&apos;s patent is proposing a design philosophy that video games already use within 3D environments. If you play first-person or 3rd person video games, you will know that at certain distances, terrain quality and texture quality will diminish the further you look ahead of your character. This is a cost-saving measure to boost performance by cutting back image quality in areas where it is less noticeable or not needed. </p><p>In the context of the patent, this LOD system would be applied to the ray-tracing pipeline instead and reduce its overall memory footprint.</p><p>This is potentially a fantastic optimization, that could have serious memory-saving (and performance-enhancing) implications in the future. Apparently, today&apos;s ray-tracing design philosophy does not have a level of detail system that can boost or reduce ray-tracing quality on the fly, making scenes expensive to render on the storage side of things. (We already know that ray tracing is seriously demanding on the GPU side.)</p><p>Technically, current RT implementations get around this by heavily utilizing upscaling technologies such as <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reference/what-is-nvidia-dlss">DLSS</a>, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reference/amd-fsr-fidelityfx-super-resolution-explained">FSR</a>, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/shadow-of-the-tomb-raider-xess-tested">XeSS</a>, or checkerboarding (console upscaling) to hide the performance penalty ray tracing has. However, having a dedicated LOD system for the ray tracing pipeline independent of render resolution will give developers a lot more flexibility on how performance can be optimized.</p><p>In real-world terms, this system should make VRAM-limited graphics cards more viable in modern ray tracing games. In particular, this could help 8GB and 10GB GPUs achieve smoother frame pacing with RT enabled in games where those VRAM capacities bottleneck performance. Potentially, Microsoft&apos;s patented solution could also make ray-tracing more playable on 6GB and even 4GB (i.e. <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/mobile-rtx-3050-ti-terrible-buy">mobile RTX 3050</a>) Nvidia GPUs that sport hardware-accelerated RT capabilities. This system could also help consoles like the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/playstation-5-sony-ps5">PlayStation 5</a> achieve more playable ray-tracing performance in memory-constrained environments. Despite it having 16GB of memory, only around 12GB is accessible by games.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Ray tracing can run without a GPU, if you like slideshows — Quake II RTX demoed at 1 FPS with CPU-based ray-tracing ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/pc-gaming/rtx-can-run-without-a-gpu-if-you-like-slideshows-quake-ii-rtx-demoed-at-1-fps-with-cpu-based-ray-tracing</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ A Mesa 3D Graphics Library developer has implemented support for CPU-based ray-tracing in Vulkan. In early testing of the driver in Quake II RTX only 1FPS performance was achieved, but it's a start. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">7gbaZoytNvHM34kQSwkL86</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hDTxBzwBfsWUjCb3dy25fS-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Fri, 08 Mar 2024 15:07:51 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:42:58 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[PC Gaming]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Video Games]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Mark Tyson ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/56vqMYLDaKRHPhHZgbADFR.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Mark&#039;s enthusiasm for computers dampened at an early age by the rubber-keyed Sinclair Spectrum 48K and feelings of Commodore 64 envy. However, in the mid-80s, hope in a digital future was rekindled by the purchase of an Atari 520 STe. Since that time Mark has used a multitude of computers for fun and professional endeavors. He often owned both Macs and PCs but went cold on the former after OS9 was killed off, and warmed to the latter with the introduction of Windows XP.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Early work years were spent in artwork and reprographics but in the late noughties, Mark started to blog about computers, Taiwanese food culture, and guitar design. This activity led to a full-time position writing about breaking PC tech news for HEXUS, for the best part of a decade. When HEXUS was abruptly closed, Mark helped with the foundation of Club386, before finding a new home at Tom&#039;s Hardware.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
When not wearing through the keycap legends on his PC keyboards, Mark can be found wandering the computer malls of Taiwan&#039;s neon-lit conurbations and enjoying local and international cuisine.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hDTxBzwBfsWUjCb3dy25fS-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Nvidia]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Quake II RTX]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Quake II RTX]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Quake II RTX]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hDTxBzwBfsWUjCb3dy25fS-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>A Mesa 3D Graphics Library developer has <a href="https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/-/merge_requests/25616">implemented</a> support for CPU-based ray-tracing in Vulkan, reports <a href="https://www.phoronix.com/news/Mesa-Lavapipe-Vulkan-RayTracing">Phoronix</a>. While we applaud the effort, early testing of the driver in Quake II RTX indicates mainstream <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">modern CPUs</a> aren&apos;t going to convince anyone to give up their <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">graphics card</a>. Developer Konstantin Seurer&apos;s screenshot shows that the ray-traced version of Quake II only runs at 1 frame per second after all his Vulkan Lavapipe driver travails.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1278px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.18%;"><img id="9JLX2ZVRaQmBEQscEcQmWS" name="1fps.jpg" alt="Vulkan ray-tracing on CPUs" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9JLX2ZVRaQmBEQscEcQmWS.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1278" height="718" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9JLX2ZVRaQmBEQscEcQmWS.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Konstantin Seurer)</span></figcaption></figure><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/linux-hits-3-percent-client-pc-market-share">Linux</a> developer Seurer admits his work is "mostly" based on porting code from the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/mesa-adds-support-for-rdna3-graphics">RADV</a> Vulkan drivers, which were designed for owners of old and new AMD Radeon graphics cards (including emulated RT on pre-<a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-big_navi-rdna2-all-we-know">RDNA2</a> GPUs). The new code is implemented in Lavapipe, a CPU-based software <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/raspberry-pi-4-vulkan-support-update">Vulkan</a> driver (for Mesa version 21.1 or newer). Specifically, Seurer&apos;s work supports VK_KHR_acceleration_structure, VK_KHR_deferred_host_operations, and VK_KHR_ray_query, in Lavapipe. This is enough to get real-time ray-tracing working via a CPU-based render path, but performance leaves much to be desired.</p><p>The Lavapipe: Implement VK_KHR_ray_query merge request by Seurer raises many questions. He provides evidence that CPU-based ray-tracing isn&apos;t going to scare GPU makers and their partners in 2024, but some more data would have been very welcome. It would have been more illuminating to know what kind of CPU was used in the developer&apos;s Quake II RTX test system, for example. The embedded screengrab shows the game was being played at 720p, but it could be a downsampled image. Moreover, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-quake-ii-rtx-available-now,39591.html">Quake II RTX</a> gamers have lots of settings to play with to fine-tune their experience. Adjusting levels of global illumination, texture filtering, reflection/refraction depth, sharpness, and more can all impact performance. We don&apos;t know what graphics/video settings were used in the 1 fps &apos;gaming&apos; session.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.17%;"><img id="AA7mDDu4YjzMrUx8VDs6KS" name="quake-ii-rtx-scene2.jpg" alt="Quake II RTX" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AA7mDDu4YjzMrUx8VDs6KS.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1280" height="719" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AA7mDDu4YjzMrUx8VDs6KS.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Nvidia)</span></figcaption></figure><p>While the consumer CPUs we have in 2024 might not be powerful enough for enjoyable real-time ray-traced gaming, we don&apos;t know what kind of crazy CPU power we will have access to in five or ten years. Thus, CPU-based ray-tracing support has a chance of being useful one day. We also wonder what one of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-announces-threadripper-hedt-and-pro-7000-wx-series-processors-96-cores-and-192-threads-for-desktops-and-workstations">newest AMD Threadripper chips</a> could manage using this Lavapipe Vulkan ray-tracing implementation coming to Mesa 24.1 (RC1 is due in April this year).</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Nvidia Reveals DLSS 3.5: AI-Powered Ray Reconstruction ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-reveals-dlss-35-ai-powered-ray-reconstruction</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Nvidia revealed its latest DLSS 3.5 technology: AI-powered ray reconstruction. Available on all RTX graphics cards, it replaces denoisers for higher quality ray traced visuals with potentially improved performance. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">7QyWqAcwb7NjYdVD4jYUfN</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EAc9TqZU63Y4k5mbXh6xTh-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 22 Aug 2023 13:00:37 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:43:09 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jarred Walton ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8uFgSGcCzKdFTTQdqonCPi.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jarred&#039;s love of computers dates back to the dark ages, when his dad brought home a DOS 2.3 PC and he left his C-64 behind. He eventually built his first custom PC in 1990 with a 286 12MHz, only to discover it was already woefully outdated when Wing Commander released a few months later. He holds a BS in Computer Science from Brigham Young University and has been working as a tech journalist since 2004, writing for AnandTech, Maximum PC, and PC Gamer. From the first S3 Virge &#039;3D decelerators&#039; to today&#039;s GPUs, Jarred keeps up with all the latest graphics trends and is the one to ask about game performance.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EAc9TqZU63Y4k5mbXh6xTh-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Nvidia (CDPR)]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Nvidia DLSS 3.5 in Cyberpunk 2077: Phantom Liberty]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Nvidia DLSS 3.5 in Cyberpunk 2077: Phantom Liberty]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Nvidia DLSS 3.5 in Cyberpunk 2077: Phantom Liberty]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EAc9TqZU63Y4k5mbXh6xTh-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Nvidia DLSS — Deep Learning Super Sampling — has come a long way over the past five years since it was first introduced. While the deep learning aspect of the name remains, the latest iterations have focused on other techniques besides super sampling. At Gamescom 2023, Nvidia revealed DLSS 3.5 with AI-powered ray reconstruction, the newest feature under the DLSS umbrella, and it&apos;s available on all RTX GPUs, unlike <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-dlss-3-only-works-with-geforce-rtx-40-series-gpus-for-now">DLSS 3&apos;s Frame Generation</a>.<br><br>The Nvidia RTX GPUs are some of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">best graphics cards</a>, but if there&apos;s one thing you can count on, it&apos;s that tomorrow&apos;s games and graphics technologies will be even more demanding than current offerings. Leveraging the power of AI to reduce some of the rendering work can potentially extend the life of older GPUs. That&apos;s assuming that future games implement the new techniques, naturally.</p><div class="youtube-video" data-nosnippet ><div class="video-aspect-box"><iframe data-lazy-priority="low" data-lazy-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/sGKCrcNsVzo" allowfullscreen></iframe></div></div><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pMTbFM4ZRAjGvzSb5zhiCY.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/u9PF4uyyHNjDeTsLx2sRBW.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LH9wS4u9wGshoRnQnsEJsX.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5MfcziA8viVSeSoLmD84uW.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9JDVFPGJtCSBhUZcseBZMX.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BaFK87CAqwPS5w9APRjWbW.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Kcts6GoKC35tqjzFLTEUiX.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ez4DutH3xW4MzNreNAaRMY.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Ray tracing remains one of the most demanding graphics rendering techniques, some would even call it the holy grail of graphics rendering. Calculating the final pixel colors based on reflections, refractions, and the physical properties of various materials takes a lot of computational power. Rather than doing ray tracing calculations on every pixel on the screen — with multiple rays per pixel — DLSS 3.5 uses AI to fill in the gaps. Nvidia calls this "ray reconstruction."<br><br>The same process can be done in other ways, via denoisers — algorithms designs to interpolate between ray traced pixels. This can be both temporal accumulation (pixels over multiple frames) or spatial interpolation (blending between neighboring pixels). In professional 3D rendering applications, you&apos;ll often see multiple passes where the initial results are a fast and approximate rendering, then as more rays are cast and the results improve, the speckled nature of the resulting view improves. DLSS 3.5 can be used in both games and applications to similar effect.<br><br>Most games with ray tracing effects already use denoisers to improve the overall quality, but just as image upscaling has benefited from deep learning, denoising can similarly benefit. Nvidia says that Ray Reconstruction has been trained to recognize different ray-traced effects, and it also leverages both temporal and spatial pixels to deliver the best result.<br><br>To demonstrate the potential of DLSS 3.5, Nvidia provided several sample slides showing the current rendering compared with DLSS 3.5&apos;s Ray Reconstruction.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6fRrfCZQUYWmBw3d6emXFZ.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vfdzEdC6PvZJtfANpjnBkZ.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DtwJQXKikKkQjCLETyBCXa.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yMCZzKZNJwHBFW5jbb247a.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sbY7NHsnFMVBG7daGqQEvZ.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/L8GyiPDRz4h3qQthuiRyQZ.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Most of the DLSS 3.5 versus "standard" images should be pretty obvious about what Ray Reconstruction brings to bear, but in <em>Portal RTX</em>, the enhanced graphics show much smoother gradients and blending with less splotchiness.<br><br>For <em>Cyberpunk 2077</em>, running in RT Overdrive, there are several improvements. First, there&apos;s again an improvement in quality with less splotchiness. There are also clearer reflections, for example on the top of the vehicle, or in the puddles on the street. Without Ray Reconstruction, the (upside-down) text in the puddle ends up smeared and illegible, while with DLSS 3.5 you can make out the letters. Finally, the headlights of the car in the first image light up more distant objects like the railing, which appears to be a change facilitated by having fewer, higher quality rays plus Ray Reconstruction.<br><br>Nvidia also provided a rough performance comparison in <em>Cyberpunk 2077</em> between native (DLSS off), DLSS 2 upscaled (Super Resolution), DLSS 3 (SR plus Frame Generation), and DLSS 3.5 (SR + FG + Ray Reconstruction). We were told that <em>Cyberpunk 2077</em> has relatively complex denoisers normally, and DLSS 3.5 is able to replace those, resulting in the performance increase along with improved lighting quality.<br><br>Finally, as a non-gaming example of DLSS 3.5, Nvidia showed <em>D5 Render</em> running in full ray tracing preview mode, with and without Ray Reconstruction. On the left, the preview looks speckled and splotchy — this would improve in quality the longer you leave the camera unchanged. DLSS 3.5 meanwhile provides a much better quality result much faster.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="jqbfezJ6ZhugQAM5a7SF3X" name="Nvidia-Gamescom-2023-(31).jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jqbfezJ6ZhugQAM5a7SF3X.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Nvidia)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Again, it&apos;s important to emphasize that Ray Reconstruction and DLSS 3.5 will be available on all RTX graphics cards, from the original 20-series, through the previous 30-series, and on to the current 40-series and future offerings. If you have an Nvidia RTX GPU and you run a game that supports DLSS 3.5, you can benefit from the feature.<br><br>At the same time, let&apos;s also be clear that this <em>only</em> benefits games that use ray tracing effects, and it also requires the games to adopt DLSS 3.5. And while DLSS 3.5 might work on all Nvidia RTX GPUs, it will provide zero benefit for AMD and Intel GPU owners. That&apos;s going to limit its appeal somewhat, but for games that are already adding DLSS 3 support — which only runs on RTX 40-series cards — this seems like it would potentially be at least as interesting as Frame Generation.<br><br>DLSS 3.5 will come out this fall, and support has already been announced for <em>Cyberpunk 2077: Phantom Liberty</em>, <em>Portal with RTX</em>, and <em>Alan Wake 2</em>. Yeah, that&apos;s not a lot of games right now, but we expect more will be announced in the coming months. Support will also be present in Nvidia&apos;s Omniverse platform, <em>Chaos Vantage</em>, and <em>D5 Render</em>.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZC5X2FtuwqyMVNj7YZJw5Z.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Sff5m3WH92ZgJaNZjxATkW.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/keenr98LECVr3rWVohfjrU.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QmB6xxDbnpUx8Qkui8yS2V.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fKUYK2mf7224BhP4g9Ca3W.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3AQfCHGezHstVn8aXMBiAV.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MbpA37SvaesCMw3D2iMFHV.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YRKGNywgwpNr2Np9GSDQQV.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7roHBSV6viZqzghALX2cYV.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/r6bfrEYTjxoUgSLJfMsfKa.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sCTt528fdMSSQu8hqGwQgV.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jcHhXEXTXokgCHkbvrV9LW.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DYdaYaakGeuVgWF56KCGUW.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/w4UTSLDZyU8V6x4X55Xh3Y.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cVgqqBKkFci4iQvBPiYpDX.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pMTbFM4ZRAjGvzSb5zhiCY.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7JJ8VRx7vf2mF6DH6iUfoV.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/u9PF4uyyHNjDeTsLx2sRBW.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LH9wS4u9wGshoRnQnsEJsX.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5MfcziA8viVSeSoLmD84uW.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9JDVFPGJtCSBhUZcseBZMX.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BaFK87CAqwPS5w9APRjWbW.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Kcts6GoKC35tqjzFLTEUiX.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ez4DutH3xW4MzNreNAaRMY.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6fRrfCZQUYWmBw3d6emXFZ.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vfdzEdC6PvZJtfANpjnBkZ.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DtwJQXKikKkQjCLETyBCXa.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yMCZzKZNJwHBFW5jbb247a.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sbY7NHsnFMVBG7daGqQEvZ.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jqbfezJ6ZhugQAM5a7SF3X.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/L8GyiPDRz4h3qQthuiRyQZ.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pKZDe94c2zNfinT6Pjj3UX.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bgeA9xK6J8nh7KX7Z7LyZZ.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YfTQFmvFY9H3DkBBvjnoaX.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6dRQF9str3VYjs3kU3AuhU.jpg" alt="Nvidia Gamescom 2023 slide deck: DLSS 3.5 and more" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Nvidia</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Nvidia also had other items of interest, though by far the most exciting will be the announcement of a community mod using RTX Remix for <em>Half-Life 2</em>. Don&apos;t get too excited, though, as work is only just starting. It does have support from Nvidia, though, which means the mod should eventually get finished and released rather than ending up as vaporware.<br><br>Elsewhere, Nvidia was pushing GeForce NOW Ultimate, with RTX 4080 (equivalent) SuperPods now deployed across the U.S. and Europe and supporting up to 240 fps streaming — for those who have a 240 Hz monitor but not a powerful GPU to go with it. Xbox Game Pass support is also coming to GeForce NOW, starting on August 24.<br><br>Nvidia also showed off some updates to its Avatar Cloud Engine, now with SteerLM — a language model that allows more customization in the types of responses you might get from an AI. This could be used with future games to allow NPCs to have real-time responses to human speech, or perhaps for more interesting (<a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/google-bots-tout-slavery-genocide">but still just as likely to be... questionable</a>) ChatGPT-type sessions.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ UL Releases 3DMark Solar Bay for Cross-Platform Ray Tracing Comparisons ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/ul-releases-3dmark-solar-bay-for-cross-platform-ray-tracing-comparisons</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ The new 3DMark Solar Bay benchmark is a cross-platform series of tests assessing ray tracing performance, and is now available for Windows and Android users. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">Z7rVJnRZNSuU7QUjgtq9q5</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5nJdCDC9KjEzz2AVeh3Dji-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 15 Aug 2023 16:53:54 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:56:21 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Mark Tyson ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/56vqMYLDaKRHPhHZgbADFR.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Mark&#039;s enthusiasm for computers dampened at an early age by the rubber-keyed Sinclair Spectrum 48K and feelings of Commodore 64 envy. However, in the mid-80s, hope in a digital future was rekindled by the purchase of an Atari 520 STe. Since that time Mark has used a multitude of computers for fun and professional endeavors. He often owned both Macs and PCs but went cold on the former after OS9 was killed off, and warmed to the latter with the introduction of Windows XP.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Early work years were spent in artwork and reprographics but in the late noughties, Mark started to blog about computers, Taiwanese food culture, and guitar design. This activity led to a full-time position writing about breaking PC tech news for HEXUS, for the best part of a decade. When HEXUS was abruptly closed, Mark helped with the foundation of Club386, before finding a new home at Tom&#039;s Hardware.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
When not wearing through the keycap legends on his PC keyboards, Mark can be found wandering the computer malls of Taiwan&#039;s neon-lit conurbations and enjoying local and international cuisine.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5nJdCDC9KjEzz2AVeh3Dji-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[UL Solutions]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[UL releases 3DMark Solar Bay]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[UL releases 3DMark Solar Bay]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[UL releases 3DMark Solar Bay]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5nJdCDC9KjEzz2AVeh3Dji-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>UL Solutions, the firm behind the well known 3DMark benchmarks suite, has just <a href="https://benchmarks.ul.com/news/ul-solutions-launches-3dmark-solar-bay-new-crossplatform-ray-tracing-benchmark">released</a> 3DMark Solar Bay. This is a new cross-platform benchmark that&apos;s designed to measure and compare <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/rtx-on-nvidia-data-shows-surprising-amount-of-gamers-use-ray-tracing-dlss">ray tracing</a> performance. At the time of writing the benchmark is available for both Windows and Android users, across a range of stores (e.g. Android Play, Windows Steam).<br><br>In a press release about Solar Bay, UL first describes the purpose and scope of ray tracing graphics technology, in case anyone has been living under a rock since the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-turing-quadro-rtx-announced,37599.html">Nvidia Turing generation</a>. It then indicates that ray tracing is quite mainstream in 2023, with dedicated GPUs in desktops and laptops having excellent ray tracing acceleration for several years, and both iGPUs and smartphones now boast some usable ray tracing frills. It thus sets the scene for why a benchmark like Solar Bay is now useful.<br><br>If you are more interested in PC ray tracing performance, and not so much cross-platform comparisons, UL reminds us that it already has "heavier ray tracing benchmarks" like Port Royal and Speed Way. That hasn&apos;t stopped legions of 3DMark testers from running this new set of tests on their ultra-powerful RTX 4090 cards, though. Check out the <a href="https://www.3dmark.com/search#advanced?test=sb%20P&cpuId=&gpuId=&gpuCount=0&gpuType=ALL&deviceType=ALL&storageModel=ALL&memoryChannels=0&country=&scoreType=overallScore&hofMode=true&showInvalidResults=false&freeParams=&minGpuCoreClock=&maxGpuCoreClock=&min">3DMark Solar Bay leaderboards</a> on the official site.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3840px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="EPq5tkaE2Q8sizKEDEy5yi" name="solar-big.jpg" alt="UL releases 3DMark Solar Bay" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EPq5tkaE2Q8sizKEDEy5yi.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="3840" height="2160" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EPq5tkaE2Q8sizKEDEy5yi.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: UL Solutions)</span></figcaption></figure><p>3DMark Solar Bay passes the tested device through three stages, ramping up ray tracing workloads by 100%. The Vulkan 1.1 API built benchmark is said to take typical &apos;bursty&apos; mobile games as its inspiration. At the end of the tests, users will be presented with four scores: an overall score, and a score for each ray traced section. Over a 20 minute test run, users can see how well their device performs, and by the end of the test see if there has been any thermal throttling — a phenomena that most often adversely affects SFF, laptop and mobile form factors.<br><br>If you are interested in giving Solar Bay a run on your PC, and you are already a 3DMark for Windows owner, you are in luck as it should become available to download within the app. If not, you can purchase the software directly from UL Solutions, or via Steam or the Epic Games Store. Android users can just download this benchmark for free via Google Play. We don&apos;t know if this benchmark will be released for Mac or iOS users (like 3DMark Wild Life is, for example), though that seems likely.</p><h2 id="some-example-scores">Some Example Scores</h2><p>The 3DMark Solar Bay benchmark is only just out, but you may be wondering about how the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">best graphics cards</a> for PCs perform, and how much faster they are compared to iGPUs and smartphones. Luckily, there is already a leaderboard to explore and search for scores. For example, the top ranked overall score today is <a href="https://www.3dmark.com/sb/8976">228,491 by LunerK9</a> using a <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-review">GeForce RTX 4090</a>.</p><div class="see-more see-more--clipped"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet hawk-ignore" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Yay, 3DMark Solar Bay - works even on my old gaming laptop with GeForce GTX 1070 mobile and the software-based ray tracing drivers. 40-69 fps. :-) Not too shabby, eh? ;-) In comparison: My work laptop with GeForce RTX 4070 mobile: 140-152 fps. pic.twitter.com/eYQrbzVsYR<a href="https://twitter.com/ChristianKlass/status/1691170113934811136">August 14, 2023</a></p></blockquote><div class="see-more__filter"></div></div><p>Product Manager of 3DMark at UL Futuremark, Christian Klass, also <a href="https://twitter.com/ChristianKlass/status/1691170113934811136/photo/1">shared his results</a> on Twitter/X. As you can see, his modest GTX 1070 desktop card scored 14,380. The best score we could see today for an AMD Radeon <a href="https://www.3dmark.com/search#advanced?test=sb%20P&cpuId=&gpuId=1526&gpuCount=0&gpuType=ALL&deviceType=ALL&storageModel=ALL&memoryChannels=0&country=&scoreType=overallScore&hofMode=true&showInvalidResults=false&freeParams=&minGpuCoreClock=&maxGpuCoreClock=">was 155,445</a>, for an RX 7900 XTX owned by Andybuc/Schwarzbacke. Meanwhile, the most recent Nvidia Ada Lovelace GPU, the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-review-asus-dual">GeForce RTX 4060</a>, could only muster a score of around 50,000, at best.<br><br>What about smartphone and integrated graphics users? We couldn&apos;t find any smartphones listed in the official rankings, sadly. But an <a href="https://www.3dmark.com/sb/6274" target="_blank">AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D</a> using the 2 CU integrated graphics turned in a result of 3,210. That GPU should still beat the one in the Samsung Exynos 2200, if you&apos;re wondering, thanks to its higher clocks. AMD&apos;s latest Radeon 780M (integrated into the Ryzen 9 7940HS) meanwhile chalked up a best current <a href="https://www.3dmark.com/sb/6193" target="_blank">result of 13,148</a>, while for reference the Intel Arc A380 has a single <a href="https://www.3dmark.com/sb/7878" target="_blank">result of 10,008</a>.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ RTX 4060 Ti 16GB Roughly 40% Faster Than 8GB at Higher Resolutions ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/rtx-4060-ti-16gb-roughly-40-faster-than-8gb-at-higher-resolutions</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ A YouTuber recently tested the 16GB and 8GB versions of the RTX 4060 Ti and found the 16GB version to be significantly faster in some games, especially at 4K resolution. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">FrExHs5zaZm3KEif4om8PB</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Jy9v335DZiTvLbNgjgcoBj-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Mon, 07 Aug 2023 19:14:33 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Wed, 05 Feb 2025 14:04:04 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Aaron Klotz ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aAk2saHqkgFuTCanz8LnmD.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Aaron began building computers back when he was 8 years old in the mid-2000s, and it’s been a hobby of his ever since then. With a focus on computer hardware, he became an avid member of the Tom’s Hardware forums several years later, helping people solve issues with their PCs. He is now a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware, writing about computer hardware news and more. When not busy playing or writing about computer hardware, he spends his free time playing video games like Star Citizen or Apex Legends.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Jy9v335DZiTvLbNgjgcoBj-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Nvidia]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Nvidia GeForce RTX 4060 Ti]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Nvidia GeForce RTX 4060 Ti]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Nvidia GeForce RTX 4060 Ti]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Jy9v335DZiTvLbNgjgcoBj-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>The RTX 4060 Ti 16GB might be one of the least attractive GPUs due to its <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-ti-16gb-goes-on-sale">$500 price point</a>, but according to a review by <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-j1vdMV1Cc&list=PPSV">Daniel Owen</a>, the GPU is substantially quicker than the $100 cheaper <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-ti-review">8GB model</a> in several modern games. In his review, Owen compared the RTX 4060 Ti 16GB to the 8GB model to see how much of a performance difference the extra VRAM capacity would provide. He found the RTX 4060 16GB provides roughly 40% extra performance in several modern 2023 titles at 1080p and 1440p resolutions. At 4K resolution, the additional VRAM is even more beneficial, giving the 16GB card twice the performance of the 8GB model (on average).</p><p>It&apos;s worth mentioning that the 4060 Ti 16GB&apos;s capacity is only advantageous in games that spill over 8GB of memory capacity. Nonetheless, Owen&apos;s review found that quite a few 2023 titles will take advantage of more than 8GB of memory.</p><div class="youtube-video" data-nosnippet ><div class="video-aspect-box"><iframe data-lazy-priority="low" data-lazy-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/_-j1vdMV1Cc" allowfullscreen></iframe></div></div><p>The tech YouTuber compared the 16GB version of the RTX 4060 Ti to the 8GB version in seven modern AAA 2023 titles, including Rachet and Clank: Rift Apart, Jedi Survivor, Forespoken, Cyberpunk 2077, Resident Evil 4, Remnant 2 and The Last of Us Part 1. Testing was also conducted at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K resolutions with various game settings (including RT settings) to see how the GPUs behave in different scenarios.</p><p>Rachet and Clank: Rift Apart is one of the most sensitive applications to the 4060 Ti 16GB&apos;s extra memory capacity. At 1080p Very High with RT enabled, the 16GB was 34% faster than the 8GB model. At 1440p, this lead was boosted to 43% and at 4K, the 4060 Ti 16GB was 85% quicker. With RT disabled, the 4060 Ti 16GB lost a bit of its lead but was still more than 30% faster at 1080p and 1440p, and over 50% quicker at 4K.</p><p>Lowering graphics quality settings to High (with no RT) made the 16GB card a whopping 50% quicker than the 8GB model at 1080p. We&apos;re not sure how this is possible, but we suspect this might be a bug with the game. So take this result with a grain of salt.</p><p>Another VRAM-sensitive title is Resident Evil 4 (2023), where the RTX 4060 Ti 16GB was 12% faster at 1080p, 9% faster at 1440p, and 24% quicker at 4K — with the game running at its maximum settings with RT effects. Tho interestingly, the 1% lows in this game are particularly sensitive to the 8GB limitation on the lower-end 4060 Ti, revealing a 77% to 113% performance advantage in 1% lows for the 16GB card at 1080P, 1440P, and 4K.</p><p>However, not all of the latest 2023 releases need more than 8GB of memory to perform well. Owen found that the RTX 4060 Ti 16GB saw no noteworthy performance improvements with Remant 2 and Jedi: Survivor at 1080P or 1440P — even with both games running in their highest graphical settings (with RT enabled on Survivor). The only exception is at 4K resolution, where the 16GB card was 7% faster in Remant 2 and 14% more performant in Jedi: Survivor compared to the 8GB model.</p><p>For a full breakdown of the rest of the games Daniel Owen tested, check out his full review on his YouTube channel.</p><p>As far as VRAM utilization is concerned, all of the games that performed better on the 16GB card did not use the whole 16GB. The most demanding title was Resident Evil 4, utilizing just 12.1GB of memory at the game&apos;s maximum settings at 4K resolution. The rest of the games (and tested resolutions) sat below 12GB, with most hovering in the 9GB to 11GB range. This is great to see and means the RTX 4060 Ti 16GB will have the additional memory capacity to spare as it ages.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2560px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="X6DeZyzKoadiGMDb9oVgZG" name="How bad is 8GB of VRAM in 2023_ The newest games, RT on_off, Ultra, High, 1080p, 1440p, 4K 5-49 screenshot.png" alt="Rachet and Clank: Rift Apart RTX 4060 Ti 8GB vs 16GB Comparison" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/X6DeZyzKoadiGMDb9oVgZG.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="2560" height="1440" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/X6DeZyzKoadiGMDb9oVgZG.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: YouTube - Daniel Owen)</span></figcaption></figure><h2 id="turns-out-dlss-3-frame-gen-consumes-extra-vram">Turns Out, DLSS 3 Frame Gen Consumes Extra VRAM</h2><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2560px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="fdjog2r7u4N8wNmoo8jcsQ" name="How bad is 8GB of VRAM in 2023_ The newest games, RT on_off, Ultra, High, 1080p, 1440p, 4K 22-55 screenshot.png" alt="RTX 4060 Ti Cyberpunk 2077 VRAM Capacity Tests w/ Frame Gen" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fdjog2r7u4N8wNmoo8jcsQ.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="2560" height="1440" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fdjog2r7u4N8wNmoo8jcsQ.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: YouTube - Daniel Owen)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Daniel Owen also tested VRAM utilization with resolution upscaling to see how that might benefit the RTX 4060 Ti 8GB. Interestingly Owen found that DLSS 3 frame generation negatively affects VRAM consumption and consumes more video memory than standard DLSS upscaling with frame generation disabled.</p><p>In testing with Cyberpunk 2077, he found that the game will consume 8426MB of VRAM at 1440P RT Ultra settings on the 16GB 4060 Ti. With DLSS Quality, memory usage drops by over a full Gigabyte down to just 7249MB, but with Frame Generation enabled, VRAM usage goes back up to 8GB (or 8000MB) roughly.</p><p>The RTX 4060 Ti 8GB suffers from the same problem, but less so since the game is approaching the hardware&apos;s 8GB limit. The 8GB memory is still a bottleneck, providing less FPS than the 16GB card, even with DLSS enabled. (To clarify, DLSS quality mode saw the closest performance gap between the two cards.)</p><p>Overall, Owen found that the more expensive RTX 4060 Ti 16GB can be substantially faster in some games, particularly at 4K resolutions, than its 8GB counterpart, proving that 8GB can be a bottleneck even on a mid-range GPU like the 4060 Ti. However, Owen&apos;s results also demonstrate that the 16GB&apos;s additional capacity is not-beneficial in all games, at least for now. It&apos;ll be interesting to see how games evolve down the road and if we&apos;ll see more of a performance gap between the two cards if games utilize more than 8GB of memory.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Graphics Card Retail Pricing Update, August 2023 ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/graphics-card-retail-pricing-update-august-2023</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ We look at the current online retail prices for the various AMD, Intel, and Nvidia graphics cards, comparing data with what we gathered at the start of July. There's no clear trend, with some GPUs going up in price while others have dropped. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">ms4U5KMeocLtpZ27qx9WUL</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jSQrkzcFCjxwa34Juz74JS-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 03 Aug 2023 19:39:50 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 10:05:23 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jarred Walton ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8uFgSGcCzKdFTTQdqonCPi.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jarred&#039;s love of computers dates back to the dark ages, when his dad brought home a DOS 2.3 PC and he left his C-64 behind. He eventually built his first custom PC in 1990 with a 286 12MHz, only to discover it was already woefully outdated when Wing Commander released a few months later. He holds a BS in Computer Science from Brigham Young University and has been working as a tech journalist since 2004, writing for AnandTech, Maximum PC, and PC Gamer. From the first S3 Virge &#039;3D decelerators&#039; to today&#039;s GPUs, Jarred keeps up with all the latest graphics trends and is the one to ask about game performance.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jSQrkzcFCjxwa34Juz74JS-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Tom&#039;s Hardware]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Graphics card GPU group photos]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Graphics card GPU group photos]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Graphics card GPU group photos]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jSQrkzcFCjxwa34Juz74JS-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>With another month in the books, we&apos;ve rummaged through the web, looking for retail prices on the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">best graphics cards</a>. Actually, we&apos;re looking at prices for all current and previous generation AMD, Intel, and Nvidia GPUs — even those that don&apos;t make sense any longer (looking at you, RTX 30-series). Since last month had some <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/prime-day-2023-cheapest-graphics-cards">Prime Day GPU deals</a>, there are some upward trends on many models, but some of the cards do show price cuts. We&apos;re also looking at data from the start of July compared to now, on August 3, so not all previous prices reflect Prime Day discounts.<br><br>We also have a "value" metric, calculated as the average FPS across our full 15-game test suite at 1080p medium, 1080p ultra, and 1440p ultra. You can&apos;t find those exact numbers in our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html">GPU benchmarks hierarchy</a>, as they use our newer test PC, and we haven&apos;t finished testing (and retesting) all the GPUs yet. Also, any GPU we didn&apos;t test at 1440p ultra (like the RX 6500 XT and Arc A380) gets a blank, along with all older GPUs that lack ray tracing hardware. However, there&apos;s little point in buying most of those at retail these days.<br><br>Preamble rambling aside, here&apos;s how things look. (Note that all the links in the first column go to the current best price we found, with a mix of Amazon, Newegg, and B&H Photo listings.)</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " >Graphics Card</th><th  >Best Retail Price</th><th  >FPS/$</th><th  >Monthly Price Change</th><th  >July Price</th><th  >Launch MSRP</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814930081" target="_blank">Radeon RX 7900 XTX</a></td><td  >$940</td><td  >0.134</td><td  >4.4%</td><td  >$900</td><td  >$1,000</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814131810" target="_blank">Radeon RX 7900 XT</a></td><td  >$750</td><td  >0.154</td><td  >-2.6%</td><td  >$770</td><td  >$900</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0C59RVD98" target="_blank">Radeon RX 7600</a></td><td  >$258</td><td  >0.211</td><td  >1.2%</td><td  >$255</td><td  >$270</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B6GKX8MD" target="_blank">Radeon RX 6950 XT</a></td><td  >$599</td><td  >0.172</td><td  >-3.4%</td><td  >$620</td><td  >$1,100</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09BZP8KZG" target="_blank">Radeon RX 6900 XT</a></td><td  >$750</td><td  >0.131</td><td  >-2.4%</td><td  >$769</td><td  >$1,000</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814930049" target="_blank">Radeon RX 6800 XT</a></td><td  >$520</td><td  >0.178</td><td  >4.0%</td><td  >$500</td><td  >$650</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814131771" target="_blank">Radeon RX 6800</a></td><td  >$440</td><td  >0.185</td><td  >-8.3%</td><td  >$480</td><td  >$580</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814137801" target="_blank">Radeon RX 6750 XT</a></td><td  >$350</td><td  >0.200</td><td  >9.4%</td><td  >$320</td><td  >$550</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814202400" target="_blank">Radeon RX 6700 XT</a></td><td  >$320</td><td  >0.206</td><td  >-8.6%</td><td  >$350</td><td  >$480</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BCL3L6ZG" target="_blank">Radeon RX 6700 10GB</a></td><td  >$270</td><td  >0.214</td><td  >-3.6%</td><td  >$280</td><td  >$430</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814137737" target="_blank">Radeon RX 6650 XT</a></td><td  >$235</td><td  >0.224</td><td  >-4.1%</td><td  >$245</td><td  >$400</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814930064" target="_blank">Radeon RX 6600 XT</a></td><td  >$270</td><td  >0.188</td><td  >10.2%</td><td  >$245</td><td  >$380</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814930066" target="_blank">Radeon RX 6600</a></td><td  >$200</td><td  >0.213</td><td  >11.1%</td><td  >$180</td><td  >$330</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/27N-0042-000G3" target="_blank">Radeon RX 6500 XT</a></td><td  >$159</td><td  >—</td><td  >6.0%</td><td  >$150</td><td  >$200</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09XSG9H94" target="_blank">Radeon RX 6400</a></td><td  >$135</td><td  >—</td><td  >8.0%</td><td  >$125</td><td  >$160</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814930077" target="_blank">Intel Arc A770 8GB</a></td><td  >$290</td><td  >0.186</td><td  >0.0%</td><td  >$290</td><td  >$330</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814930102" target="_blank">Intel Arc A770 16GB</a></td><td  >$330</td><td  >0.177</td><td  >-13.2%</td><td  >$380</td><td  >$350</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BJJPCPY2" target="_blank">Intel Arc A750</a></td><td  >$220</td><td  >0.238</td><td  >-4.3%</td><td  >$230</td><td  >$250</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814930076" target="_blank">Intel Arc A380</a></td><td  >$120</td><td  >—</td><td  >0.0%</td><td  >$120</td><td  >$140</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BGJRHX1X" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 4090</a></td><td  >$1,599</td><td  >0.102</td><td  >0.0%</td><td  >$1,599</td><td  >$1,600</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BKK371SB" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 4080</a></td><td  >$1,100</td><td  >0.127</td><td  >10.0%</td><td  >$1,000</td><td  >$1,200</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BWN5QPKP" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 4070 Ti</a></td><td  >$774</td><td  >0.159</td><td  >-2.0%</td><td  >$790</td><td  >$800</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0C4F61WXV" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 4070</a></td><td  >$590</td><td  >0.176</td><td  >-1.3%</td><td  >$598</td><td  >$600</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1777416-REG" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB</a></td><td  >$500</td><td  >—</td><td  >—</td><td  >—</td><td  >$500</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0C5P31ZK6" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 4060 Ti</a></td><td  >$374</td><td  >0.218</td><td  >-2.0%</td><td  >$381</td><td  >$400</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0C7YPGFFW" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 4060</a></td><td  >$280</td><td  >0.237</td><td  >-6.7%</td><td  >$300</td><td  >$300</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814126555" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 3090 Ti</a></td><td  >$1,456</td><td  >0.083</td><td  >-8.4%</td><td  >$1,589</td><td  >$2,000</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814126456" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 3090</a></td><td  >$1,177</td><td  >0.100</td><td  >-3.9%</td><td  >$1,224</td><td  >$1,500</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814137651" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 3080 Ti</a></td><td  >$914</td><td  >0.120</td><td  >14.2%</td><td  >$800</td><td  >$1,200</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814932504" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 3080 12GB</a></td><td  >$835</td><td  >—</td><td  >-6.5%</td><td  >$893</td><td  >$800</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814126525" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 3080</a></td><td  >$690</td><td  >0.147</td><td  >-3.1%</td><td  >$712</td><td  >$700</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BRTMP3WJ" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 3070 Ti</a></td><td  >$480</td><td  >0.179</td><td  >-9.4%</td><td  >$530</td><td  >$600</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/1FT-000M-003A1" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 3070</a></td><td  >$380</td><td  >0.213</td><td  >-7.3%</td><td  >$410</td><td  >$500</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BRYHR5JY" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 3060 Ti</a></td><td  >$335</td><td  >0.217</td><td  >4.7%</td><td  >$320</td><td  >$400</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814137758" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 3060</a></td><td  >$280</td><td  >0.197</td><td  >7.7%</td><td  >$260</td><td  >$330</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814932613" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 3050</a></td><td  >$225</td><td  >0.177</td><td  >2.3%</td><td  >$220</td><td  >$250</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07NXYT866" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 2060</a></td><td  >$208</td><td  >0.205</td><td  >-13.4%</td><td  >$240</td><td  >$300</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814932131" target="_blank">GeForce GTX 1660 Ti</a></td><td  >$207</td><td  >—</td><td  >-13.7%</td><td  >$240</td><td  >$280</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814932272" target="_blank">GeForce GTX 1660 Super</a></td><td  >$201</td><td  >—</td><td  >0.5%</td><td  >$200</td><td  >$230</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814932138" target="_blank">GeForce GTX 1660</a></td><td  >$207</td><td  >—</td><td  >-5.0%</td><td  >$218</td><td  >$220</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://shop.asus.com/us/90yv0e42-m0aa00-tuf-gtx1650s-o4g-gaming.html" target="_blank">GeForce GTX 1650 Super</a></td><td  >$210</td><td  >—</td><td  >-4.2%</td><td  >$219</td><td  >$160</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1697379-REG" target="_blank">GeForce GTX 1650 GDDR6</a></td><td  >$140</td><td  >—</td><td  >-6.7%</td><td  >$150</td><td  >$150</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814137415" target="_blank">GeForce GTX 1650</a></td><td  >$165</td><td  >—</td><td  >-7.8%</td><td  >$179</td><td  >$150</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814137756" target="_blank">GeForce GTX 1630</a></td><td  >$139</td><td  >—</td><td  >0.0%</td><td  >$139</td><td  >$150</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>A lot is going on with the expected monthly price fluctuations. Starting with AMD, the RX 7900 XTX and RX 7600 increased slightly in price, along with a few other cards. Meanwhile, the RX 7900 XT and RX 6800, plus the remaining cards, all dropped a bit. We saw some good deals on most of the AMD GPUs, thanks to Prime Day (which extended to the start of July in some cases), so if you missed out, you&apos;re now looking at paying slightly more for most of the cards.<br><br>The story reads the same for Intel Arc, with the A770 16GB dropping to $330 ($20 below the launch MSRP), thanks to the ASRock model. The A770 8GB held steady, as did the A380, and the A750 dropped slightly to $220. However, we&apos;ve seen the A750 go for as little as $199 in the past, so current prices have increased by 10%.<br><br>For Nvidia, the RTX 30-series isn&apos;t worth considering anymore, except for <em>maybe</em> the RTX 3070. It&apos;s now down to $380, and performance (not counting Frame Generation) basically ties the newer RTX 4060 Ti 8GB. But it also draws more power, and for the price, we&apos;d lean toward the RTX 40-series instead, even if they have narrower memory interfaces. If you&apos;re willing to go even older, there&apos;s also the RTX 2060, now starting at just over $200, which still outperforms the RTX 3050 in most games. It makes the GTX 16-series parts largely pointless at the current retail prices.<br><br>Nvidia&apos;s newer RTX 40-series cards have mostly held steady, though the RTX 4080 increased from its all-time low of $1,000 to $1,100. The RTX 4060 dropped by 7%, potentially providing the best bang for the buck from Nvidia and nearly matching the Arc A750 (if you&apos;re only looking at the performance of the GPU relative to its current price and not factoring in the rest of the PC cost). And then there&apos;s the new RTX 4060 Ti 16GB, which we haven&apos;t tested yet (soon, though).<br><br>Sticking with the value topic, the standings are mostly what you&apos;d expect. Overpriced cards like the faster RTX 30-series GPUs rank poorly, as do the RTX 4090 and 4080. AMD&apos;s RX 7900 XTX/XT aren&apos;t that great of a value either, while the RX 6950 XT marks the bottom of the middle section of the value rankings. It&apos;s all somewhat subjective, however, as PC cost and the games you play are definitely things to consider — AMD GPUs, for instance, take a hit in ray tracing games, so if you don&apos;t care about ray tracing, they will move up the rankings.<br><br>With the end of summer now in sight, we&apos;re mostly in a holding pattern while we wait for the back-to-school sales to kick in. Or there&apos;s always Black Friday if you can hold out until November... but <a href="https://youtu.be/YRpvIiz9G8A?t=5" target="_blank">we don&apos;t talk about Black Friday</a>.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ DirectStorage Bug Drops Frame Rates in Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart  ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/directstorage-bug-destroys-frame-rates-in-ratchet-and-clank-rift-apart</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ A new report has confirmed that GeForce GPUs are suffering from a performance bug, where deleting the game's DirectStorage files improves game performance on Nvidia RTX GPUs. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">xPLJCNnzzyLc6p8WVsaEca</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xQCHNXLhyJEKMLWPx2aHx9-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 03 Aug 2023 17:37:09 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:54:33 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Aaron Klotz) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Aaron Klotz ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aAk2saHqkgFuTCanz8LnmD.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Aaron began building computers back when he was 8 years old in the mid-2000s, and it’s been a hobby of his ever since then. With a focus on computer hardware, he became an avid member of the Tom’s Hardware forums several years later, helping people solve issues with their PCs. He is now a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware, writing about computer hardware news and more. When not busy playing or writing about computer hardware, he spends his free time playing video games like Star Citizen or Apex Legends.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xQCHNXLhyJEKMLWPx2aHx9-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Tom&#039;s Hardware]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Ratchet &amp; Clank: Rift Apart]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Ratchet &amp; Clank: Rift Apart]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Ratchet &amp; Clank: Rift Apart]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xQCHNXLhyJEKMLWPx2aHx9-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>ComputerBase <a href="https://www.computerbase.de/2023-08/ratchet-und-clank-rift-apart-ohne-directstorage-gibt-es-mehr-fps-auf-geforce-gpus/">revealed</a> that <em>Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart</em> is suffering from a serious performance bug that is tanking performance on GeForce RTX hardware. The culprit is a bug related to <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/ratchet-and-clank-rift-apart-arrives-with-directstorage-support">DirectStorage</a>, where deleting the game&apos;s DirectStorage DLL files will significantly improve the game&apos;s performance on team green&apos;s <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">best graphics cards</a>. Thankfully, the issue does not affect AMD Radeon GPUs; ComputerBase reports that Intel Arc GPUs could be affected, though they did not test any Arc GPUs.<br><br>In testing with an RTX 4080 at 4K, ComputerBase found that deleting the game&apos;s <em>"dstorage.dll" </em>and <em>"dstoragecore.dll"</em> files resulted in 10% higher frame rates, starting from 118.6 FPS with the game in its original state, and boosting to 129.7 FPS after the files were removed. The 1% percentile frame rates were even more sensitive, improving by a whopping 26% after executing the same modifications. The game minimum fps was 85 in its original state, increasing to 107.4 FPS after the DirectStorage files were deleted.<br><br>The German outlet also tested an RX 7900 XTX and found that the AMD GPU did not suffer from the same problems. Removing the files only improved performance by 1% which is well within margin of error.<br><br>Going back to GeForce users, the DirectStorage issues go beyond the GPUs performance problems. Apparently, the game&apos;s performance on GeForce hardware is also affected by the SSD speed when leaving the DirectStorage files intact. ComputerBase&apos;s RTX 4080 ran the game slower on a SATA-based SSD compared to running the game on a faster NVMe drive.<br><br>But the most bizarre issue with the DirectStorage files is that they don&apos;t appear to do anything of value, and removing them does not result in any issues. ComputerBase reports that removing the files does not slow down storage-demanding aspects of the game, but in fact improves load times and asset streaming performance. Rift jumps, for instance, are smoother on RTX hardware and load slightly quicker with the DirectStorage files gone.</p><p>It&apos;s difficult to say what&apos;s going on here, but there&apos;s clearly a serious bug surrounding Nixxes&apos; DirectStorage implementation in <em>Rachet and Clank: Rift Apart</em> that is hampering performance on GeForce hardware. Given the game is supposed to use RTX IO, an Nvidia-tuned variant of DirectStorage, it&apos;s possible there are RTX-specific extras that are taking away from GPU compute time in order to decompress assets. Even so, a 10% or larger drop in frame rates definitely shouldn&apos;t be part of the package.<br><br>Nixxes has not announced a fix at this time, but we expect one to come out once knowledge of the issue spreads.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ AMD Fixes Ray Tracing Crashes in Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-fixes-ray-tracing-crashes-in-ratchet-and-clank-rift-apart</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ After arriving with game-breaking bugs on AMD hardware last week, AMD has fixed its driver timeout and application crashing issues in Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart with a new hotfix driver update. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">z2g2EAQ9Cgxg8WgSS4FXzP</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NVE7DP7aoQyuHgsARSxo68-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 01 Aug 2023 16:25:22 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:56:14 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Video Games]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Aaron Klotz) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Aaron Klotz ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aAk2saHqkgFuTCanz8LnmD.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Aaron began building computers back when he was 8 years old in the mid-2000s, and it’s been a hobby of his ever since then. With a focus on computer hardware, he became an avid member of the Tom’s Hardware forums several years later, helping people solve issues with their PCs. He is now a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware, writing about computer hardware news and more. When not busy playing or writing about computer hardware, he spends his free time playing video games like Star Citizen or Apex Legends.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NVE7DP7aoQyuHgsARSxo68-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Steam]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NVE7DP7aoQyuHgsARSxo68-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>A week after the game&apos;s launch, AMD has released a hotfix Adrenalin update just for <em>Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart</em> that fixes the game&apos;s notorious application crashes and driver timeout issues. The driver update is known as <a href="https://www.amd.com/en/support/kb/release-notes/rn-rad-win-23-10-23-03-rcra" target="_blank"><em>Adrenalin Edition 23.10.23.03 for Ratchet & Clank™: Rift Apart</em></a><em>, </em>and can be downloaded at that link.<br><br><em>Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart </em>launched on PC with <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/ratchet-and-clank-rift-apart-crashes-on-amd-gpus-when-ray-tracing-is-enabled">broken driver support</a> from AMD. The game reportedly suffered from driver timeout failures on top of game crashes on the RX 7900 XTX and some other Radeon GPUs when AMD&apos;s dynamic resolution scaling or the game&apos;s ray tracing effects were enabled.<br><br>Thankfully, the game was apparently in a playable state without any of these features enabled, but it&apos;s not something you want to see on launch day when everyone wants to check out what the game can do and how good the game can look. At least now Radeon gamers no longer have to put up with these issues and can crank up the game&apos;s RT effects without stability issues.<br><br>On top of this, the team behind <em>Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart</em> released another major update yesterday fixing more of the game&apos;s graphical issues — these were separate from the AMD driver problems, including low-resolution texture streaming issues, issues with water reflections, additional optimizations, and more. This should make the game even smoother and more playable than it was before, on top of the items fixed by AMD&apos;s new driver.<br><br>As previously mentioned, this was a hotfix (i.e. emergency) driver update for <em>Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart</em> specifically, so the update does not come with any additional updates or bug fixes from 23.7.2. If you are not playing <em>Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart</em>, this driver should behave exactly like 23.7.2. That means some of the other reported <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/adrenalin-23-7-2-marks-return-bad-amd-drivers">problems with the 23.7.2 drivers</a>, including poor performance on certain mobile solutions, still remain.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE Launches at $649 ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-radeon-rx-7900-gre-launch</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ AMD has made the Radeon RX 7900 GRE official, and the ChinaJoy launched GPU should be available soon at around $649. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">cBE8CqCDhowig75ygLCBcP</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mzGtu4Fh39KRSyCLb3Srri-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jul 2023 16:01:36 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:56:03 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Mark Tyson ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/56vqMYLDaKRHPhHZgbADFR.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Mark&#039;s enthusiasm for computers dampened at an early age by the rubber-keyed Sinclair Spectrum 48K and feelings of Commodore 64 envy. However, in the mid-80s, hope in a digital future was rekindled by the purchase of an Atari 520 STe. Since that time Mark has used a multitude of computers for fun and professional endeavors. He often owned both Macs and PCs but went cold on the former after OS9 was killed off, and warmed to the latter with the introduction of Windows XP.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Early work years were spent in artwork and reprographics but in the late noughties, Mark started to blog about computers, Taiwanese food culture, and guitar design. This activity led to a full-time position writing about breaking PC tech news for HEXUS, for the best part of a decade. When HEXUS was abruptly closed, Mark helped with the foundation of Club386, before finding a new home at Tom&#039;s Hardware.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
When not wearing through the keycap legends on his PC keyboards, Mark can be found wandering the computer malls of Taiwan&#039;s neon-lit conurbations and enjoying local and international cuisine.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mzGtu4Fh39KRSyCLb3Srri-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[AMD]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Radeon RX 7900 GRE]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Radeon RX 7900 GRE]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Radeon RX 7900 GRE]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mzGtu4Fh39KRSyCLb3Srri-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Recent <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-radeon-rx-7900-gre-debuts">rumors</a> about a new AMD Radeon 7000 series GPU were correct. AMD <a href="https://weibo.com/n/AMD%E4%B8%AD%E5%9B%BD">launched</a> the <a href="https://www.amd.com/en/products/graphics/amd-radeon-rx-7900-gre">Radeon RX 7900 GRE</a> graphics card at the ChinaJoy expo earlier today. Contrary to some talk that the new &apos;Golden Rabbit Edition&apos; might be a China exclusive, it looks like this 16GB RDNA 3 GPU will be offered worldwide. Moreover, an AMD slide included USD pricing, so we know you should be able to grab one of these GPUs for about $649 shortly.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1536px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:48.37%;"><img id="NTvEsCyAXQvDm5CGxb5m9j" name="650-usd.jpg" alt="Radeon RX 7900 GRE" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NTvEsCyAXQvDm5CGxb5m9j.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1536" height="743" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NTvEsCyAXQvDm5CGxb5m9j.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: AMD)</span></figcaption></figure><p>AMD aims the new Radeon RX 7900 GRE at 1440p resolution in "today&apos;s and tomorrow&apos;s games at maximum settings." The product pages and slides shared at ChinaJoy are designed to back up this assertion. For example, it says demanding titles like <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/cyberpunk-2077-adding-new-nvidia-denoiser">Cyberpunk 2077</a>, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-polaris-forsaken-dx12">Forspoken</a> (with Raytracing) and Deadspace (with Raytracing) can all run at an average of 72fps or better with max settings at the 1440p resolution.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1301px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:45.43%;"><img id="e5Jet2ctNb4S7ZsxWWxmzi" name="official-benches.jpg" alt="Radeon RX 7900 GRE" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/e5Jet2ctNb4S7ZsxWWxmzi.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1301" height="591" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/e5Jet2ctNb4S7ZsxWWxmzi.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: AMD)</span></figcaption></figure><p>In its promotional slides, AMD painted the Radeon RX 7900 GRE as the successor to the RX 6800 XT. A gen-to-gen comparison is provided in the slide below.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2533px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:51.36%;"><img id="2U6nBrncGE9YXD8npuz3Sj" name="amd-gen-to-gen.jpg" alt="Radeon RX 7900 GRE" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2U6nBrncGE9YXD8npuz3Sj.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="2533" height="1301" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: AMD)</span></figcaption></figure><p>It is an interesting comparison, and if you haven&apos;t noticed it yet, the new GPU is a little more cut down than the rumors suggested. The critical difference between the pre-launch rumor and actuality is that the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE has 80 CUs for 5120 SPs. Rumorville has indicated that 5376 SPs would be present, just like with the RX 7900 XT. AMD seems to have sought to establish a more evident difference between the pair. Check out the chart below for a comparative grasp of the newest RX 7900 variant next to its two siblings. Other cuts to the GRE are made in the memory section and the cache.</p><div ><table><caption>AMD Radeon RX 7900 family GPU Specifications</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " >Graphics Card</th><th  >RX 7900 XTX</th><th  >RX 7900 XT</th><th  >RX 7900 GRE</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " >Architecture</td><td  >Navi 31</td><td  >Navi 31</td><td  >Navi 31</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >CUs / SMs</td><td  >96</td><td  >84</td><td  >80</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >GPU Shaders</td><td  >6144</td><td  >5376</td><td  >5120</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Ray Tracing Units</td><td  >96</td><td  >84</td><td  >80</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Boost Clock (MHz)</td><td  >2500</td><td  >2400</td><td  >2245</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >VRAM Speed (Gbps)</td><td  >20</td><td  >20</td><td  >18</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >VRAM (GB)</td><td  >24</td><td  >20</td><td  >16</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >VRAM Bus Width</td><td  >384</td><td  >320</td><td  >256</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >L2 Cache</td><td  >96</td><td  >80</td><td  >64</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Bandwidth (GBps)</td><td  >960</td><td  >800</td><td  >576</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >TBP (watts)</td><td  >355</td><td  >315</td><td  >260</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Launch Date</td><td  >Dec-22</td><td  >Dec-22</td><td  >July-23</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Launch Price</td><td  >$999 </td><td  >$899 </td><td  >$649</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>With the China-based launch, you might not be surprised that Chinese tech media have been the first to get their hands on the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE. You can nose through Chinese language reviews on sites like <a href="https://www.expreview.com/89405.html">EXPReview</a> today, but your browser translator probably won&apos;t translate the graphics and charts. If you check carefully, these third-party results will be an interesting counterpoint to AMD&apos;s in-house testing figures. Before purchasing, waiting for a review here or on another site you trust is probably best. One thing that is quickly evident through the tests is that the RX 7900 GRE outperforms the Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070, though it is about $50 more expensive.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7FX3adA7z8ZoA9S8MkCUei.jpg" alt="Radeon RX 7900 GRE" /><figcaption><small role="credit">AMD</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/L3oGBDWphSPVEdjW6LWfVi.jpg" alt="Radeon RX 7900 GRE" /><figcaption><small role="credit">AMD</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>While we wait for some more upper-midrange cards from AMD, like the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/alleged-prices-of-amds-rx-7700-and-rx-7800-leak">Radeon RX 7700 and RX 7800</a>, getting another RX 7900 family member is welcome today. AMD is effectively filling a gap with the Radeon RX 7900 GRE release, which helps us gauge what it might be thinking with the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-radeon-rx-7700-7800-performance-leaked">Radeon RX 7700 and RX 7800 models</a>. Just over a week ago, we heard that the Radeon RX 7700 and RX 7800 may be priced at $449 and $549, respectively. That seems to work with the new GRE at its $649 price point. Which, if any of these, will earn a place in our definitive <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">Best Graphics Cards for Gaming in 2023</a> roundup? We shall have to wait and see.</p><h2 id="partner-product-pages-start-to-go-live">Partner Product Pages Start to Go Live</h2><p>You may have spied PowerColor and Sapphire (and XFX) reps on stage with AMD at ChinaJoy. As we were writing, pages for partner designs are now active.</p><p>Specifically, PowerColor&apos;s <a href="https://www.powercolor.com/cn/product?id=1688554377">Red Devil AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE 16GB GDDR6</a> is now on-site. PowerColor says this triple 100mm fan design features a septet of 6mm heat pipes, a large copper base, and an 11+2+1 phase power supply design for smooth running. Other niceties of the Red Devil include its reinforced metal backplate, dual-BIOS, and quality PCB. RGB lighting is present too.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eYuBe5N4AuPzmZwf96A3Tj.jpg" alt="PowerColor's Red Devil AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE 16GB GDDR6" /><figcaption><small role="credit">PowerColor</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cQ9XjDSm2rhzZB4vZUoPXj.jpg" alt="Sapphire Radeon RX 7900 GRE Nitro+" /><figcaption><small role="credit">JD.com</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>VideoCardz also <a href="https://videocardz.com/newz/sapphire-nitro-and-powercolor-red-devil-radeon-rx-7900-gre-graphics-cards-announced">spotted</a> a Sapphire listing now on Chinese retailer <a href="https://item.jd.com/10030236470691.html">JD.com</a>. You can see an image of the Nitro+ SKU and its key specs in the gallery above. China prices aren&apos;t usually closely related to US prices, and let&apos;s hope so, as the Sapphire is listed at 5,499 RMB (~$770) at the time of writing.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Remnant II Devs Designed Game With DLSS/FSR 'Upscaling In Mind' ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/remnant-ii-devs-designed-game-with-dlssfsr-upscaling-in-mind</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Remnant 2's developers confirm that the game is designed to be played with image upscalers. YouTuber Daniel Owen confirmed this, revealing that an RTX 3080 12GB is required to run the game at 1080p ultra settings. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">KBwGNfQC5VXnvGjjji55BD</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/D7vca8WHAp5c4NAHT8Tezg-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jul 2023 19:57:46 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:52:46 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Aaron Klotz) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Aaron Klotz ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aAk2saHqkgFuTCanz8LnmD.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Aaron began building computers back when he was 8 years old in the mid-2000s, and it’s been a hobby of his ever since then. With a focus on computer hardware, he became an avid member of the Tom’s Hardware forums several years later, helping people solve issues with their PCs. He is now a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware, writing about computer hardware news and more. When not busy playing or writing about computer hardware, he spends his free time playing video games like Star Citizen or Apex Legends.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/D7vca8WHAp5c4NAHT8Tezg-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Remnant 2]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Remnant 2]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Remnant 2]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Remnant 2]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/D7vca8WHAp5c4NAHT8Tezg-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>The developers behind Unreal Engine 5 game <em>Remnant 2</em> have confirmed <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/remnantgame/comments/156syue/technical_information_and_troubleshooting/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2">via Reddit</a> that the game was designed with DLSS/FSR/XeSS image upscaling in mind to achieve playable frame rates on modern PC hardware — rather than being optimized to run at native resolution, as many PC gamers would expect. Unsurprisingly this did not sit well with the <em>Remnant 2</em> gaming community, with many Redditors calling out the devs for laziness.</p><p>Image scaling is a very effective tool for improving performance on computer hardware. With the right upscaler you can get extremely good returns on gaming performance with a low cost to image quality. However, relying on upscaling tools from the start to achieve a playable performance is not very common (though it&apos;s becoming more common) in the PC landscape. </p><p>In the past, image upscalers on the PC platform were mostly used as a last resort to improve performance, not used at the forefront of improving performance, like they are with consoles. Another problem is that upscalers can hide bad or sloppy game optimizations behind the scenes, which will reduce the amount of performance a system can naturally provide.</p><div class="youtube-video" data-nosnippet ><div class="video-aspect-box"><iframe data-lazy-priority="low" data-lazy-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/RVS3H9oMnhw" allowfullscreen></iframe></div></div><p>Unfortunately, Daniel Owen on YouTube confirmed the developer&apos;s statement to be true, uncovering the fact that the game is extremely intensive at all graphics settings. At the game&apos;s default settings — consisting of medium graphics settings and DLSS performance mode — an RTX 2060/i5-9600K system was only able to hit just above 60 fps at 1080p resolution. Owen tried to get a 60 fps experience at native resolution but found this was impossible, even at low settings. On top of this, the game also suffered from severe micro stutter due to the older Intel CPU.</p><p>To hit 60 fps at 1080p ultra settings — a configuration modern 60-class cards can achieve with most titles — Owned had to jump up from the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2060-ray-tracing-turing,5960.html">RTX 2060</a> to an <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-review">RTX 3080</a> 12GB. To get a similar performance at 1440p (let alone 4K), Owen had to jump even higher — to Nvidia&apos;s current flagship GPU, the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-review">RTX 4090</a>.</p><p>There is no denying that this game is incredibly demanding, and most gamers will almost certainly be using image upscalers to run the game at playable frame rates. Unfortunately, we don&apos;t know how many of these issues are related to sloppy game optimization or if the game is actually that intensive. </p><p>The worst part is that the game does not look visually stunning, compared to similarly demanding AAA titles like <em>Cyberpunk 2077</em> (and even Unreal Engine 5 demos), which makes the game’s reliance on heavy image upscaling pretty embarrassing. In fact, we’re not sure if the game even has any <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-vs-nvidia-best-gpu-for-ray-tracing">ray-tracing effects</a> since the graphics menu lacks any of these more demanding options. Hopefully the developers will push out performance updates in the future that will alleviate at least <em>some </em>of the performance demands.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart Crashes on AMD GPUs When Ray-Tracing is Enabled ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/ratchet-and-clank-rift-apart-crashes-on-amd-gpus-when-ray-tracing-is-enabled</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ The new Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart PC port is reportedly crashing on some AMD graphics hardware when ray-tracing and DSR are enabled. But a fix is in the works. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">gXVN53J45Jc99ZkzHDrZRF</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sE8sagyFk6bxw6RfkCznpm-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jul 2023 16:03:48 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:49:51 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Video Games]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Aaron Klotz) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Aaron Klotz ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aAk2saHqkgFuTCanz8LnmD.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Aaron began building computers back when he was 8 years old in the mid-2000s, and it’s been a hobby of his ever since then. With a focus on computer hardware, he became an avid member of the Tom’s Hardware forums several years later, helping people solve issues with their PCs. He is now a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware, writing about computer hardware news and more. When not busy playing or writing about computer hardware, he spends his free time playing video games like Star Citizen or Apex Legends.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sE8sagyFk6bxw6RfkCznpm-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Steam]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sE8sagyFk6bxw6RfkCznpm-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Patch notes for <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-phoenix-processors-finally-get-adrenalin-gpu-drivers-ryzen-7-7840s-appears">AMD&apos;s latest Adrenalin driver update</a>, <a href="https://www.amd.com/en/support/kb/release-notes/rn-rad-win-23-7-2">version 23.7.2</a>, confirmed that some Radeon GPUs (including its <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">best GPU</a>, the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top">RX 7900 XTX</a>) are crashing while playing <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/ratchet-and-clank-rift-apart-arrives-with-directstorage-support"><em>Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart</em></a> with ray-tracing effects enabled. AMD is actively working on a fix but has not provided a release date for when the issue will be fixed. Based on the patch notes there appears to be a driver-related bug — but it could also be a game-specific issue that needs to be fixed by Nixxes.</p><p>Sadly, launch-day game crashes related to ray-tracing effects are nothing new in the modern gaming industry. Many games over the past few years have had their share of RT-related crashing issues, including <em>Elden Ring, Spider-Man Remastered, The Witcher 3 Enhanced Edition, </em>and<em> </em><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/cyberpunk-2077-amd-ryzen-performance-bug-fix-testing"><em>Cyberpunk 2077</em></a> (to name a few). This isn&apos;t helped by the fact that most games on launch day arrive with game-breaking bugs and unpredictable instability in general as we saw with <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/jedi-survivor-prelaunch-vram-rtx-4090"><em>Star Wars Jedi: Survivor</em></a>.</p><p>Even though <em>Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart</em> is not a new game, the PC porting process performed by Nixxes can still lead to potential stability issues on launch day since the game code has been reworked to function on non-PlayStation 5 hardware. We saw this somewhat with <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/spider-man-pc-port-performance-benchmarks-settings"><em>Spider-Man Remastered</em></a><em>, </em>where its PC performance was drastically improved after several weeks of updates (on top of bug fixes).</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="pr9t3GcTjMuyEo2C7pYTmF" name="ss_42a493ca72a0567e392a83ad5fc0ff4253297045.1920x1080.jpg" alt="Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pr9t3GcTjMuyEo2C7pYTmF.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Steam)</span></figcaption></figure><p>AMD&apos;s patch notes specifically highlight that <em>Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart</em> can crash or display a driver timeout while playing the game with ray-tracing enabled and dynamic resolution scaling enabled on some AMD GPUs, such as the RX 7900 XTX, suggesting this could be more of an issue with newer RDNA GPUs. If you have this problem, it&apos;s best to try disabling DSR and any RT effects before launching the game.</p><p>Thankfully AMD seems to be the only GPU manufacturer with these specific <em>Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart</em> game crashes. Nvidia and Intel appear to be clean, with their latest GPU drivers supporting the new title, and no mentions of game-related bugs in their patch notes.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart Arrives With DirectStorage Support ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/ratchet-and-clank-rift-apart-arrives-with-directstorage-support</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ The PC port of Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart is launching tomorrow on Steam with a whole host of PC-exclusive features, and will arrive with GPU decompression support. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">VqPci39Y7upsWqgFSryeZ7</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pr9t3GcTjMuyEo2C7pYTmF-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jul 2023 15:49:30 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:52:21 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Video Games]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Aaron Klotz) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Aaron Klotz ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aAk2saHqkgFuTCanz8LnmD.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Aaron began building computers back when he was 8 years old in the mid-2000s, and it’s been a hobby of his ever since then. With a focus on computer hardware, he became an avid member of the Tom’s Hardware forums several years later, helping people solve issues with their PCs. He is now a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware, writing about computer hardware news and more. When not busy playing or writing about computer hardware, he spends his free time playing video games like Star Citizen or Apex Legends.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pr9t3GcTjMuyEo2C7pYTmF-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Steam]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pr9t3GcTjMuyEo2C7pYTmF-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart will <a href="https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/ratchet-and-clank-rift-apart-dlss3-rtx-io/">make its PC debut on Steam</a> from July 26 with a whole host of new features including Microsoft DirectStorage support and GPU decompression technology. </p><p>Using Microsoft <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/directstorage-12-adds-buffered-io-mode-to-speed-hdd-performance">DirectStorage 1.2</a> and GPU decompression technology, and as far as we can tell, Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart will be the first game ever to incorporate GPU decompression through the DirectStorage API. DirectStorage support is set to significantly boost game load times and real-time asset streaming.</p><p>Unlike previous games that feature GPU decompression technology, like <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/portal-prelude-rtx-50-faster-load-times-rtx-io-gpu-decompression">Portal: Prelude RTX</a> which used Nvidia&apos;s Vulkan extensions Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart&apos;s gameplay requires Microsoft&apos;s DirectStorage GPU decompression to run the game at playable frame rates. As players blast their way through interdimensional portals, new game worlds, textures and assets are streamed in real-time, which wouldn&apos;t be possible without GPU decompression. For more details be sure to check out our previous coverage <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/rachet-and-clank-could-be-first-pc-game-with-gpu-decompression">here</a>.</p><div class="youtube-video" data-nosnippet ><div class="video-aspect-box"><iframe data-lazy-priority="low" data-lazy-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/K0Vw1Sa4mE4" allowfullscreen></iframe></div></div><ul><li><a target="_blank" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/dlss3-ai-powered-neural-graphics-innovations&source=gmail-imap&ust=1690894841000000&usg=AOvVaw0RT1TnlQI21C1TIm0VixWP">NVIDIA DLSS 3</a> - AI-powered performance multiplier. At 4K, with all ray tracing effects enabled, and settings maxed, GeForce RTX 4080 and 4090 desktop GPU gamers can experience 140+ FPS gameplay.</li><li><a target="_blank" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/technologies/reflex/&source=gmail-imap&ust=1690894841000000&usg=AOvVaw1aSlMjvr26WZU89IQYb0-y">NVIDIA Reflex</a> - reducing system latency in <em>Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart</em> by up to 48%.</li><li><a target="_blank" href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/rtx-io-for-geforce-gpus-available-now&source=gmail-imap&ust=1690894841000000&usg=AOvVaw35UB0rjceQGSrfi52AMmGd">NVIDIA RTX IO</a> - GPU-accelerated storage technology enables rapid loading of assets.</li><li>NVIDIA DLAA - an AI-based anti-aliasing mode for users who have spare GPU headroom and want higher levels of image quality.</li><li>Ray tracing - Ray-traced shadows, ambient occlusion and reflections will run at the highest speeds possible on dedicated ray tracing cores on each GeForce RTX GPUs</li></ul><div class="youtube-video" data-nosnippet ><div class="video-aspect-box"><iframe data-lazy-priority="low" data-lazy-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/F6BWctU2n5g" allowfullscreen></iframe></div></div><p>Besides GPU decompression, the game has received an extensive amount of PC upgrades to differentiate it from the original <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ratchet-and-clank-rift-apart-ps5">PS5 version</a>. These upgrades include DLSS 2/3, DLAA, AMD FSR 2, and Intel&apos;s XeSS technology integration for boosting performance with image upscaling/downscaling. Support for ultrawide aspect ratios like 21:9, 32:9, and 48:9, and improved ray-traced graphics including RT reflections and RT shadows have also been added.</p><p>The game focuses on Ratchet and Clank, a pair of intergalactic adventurers who are focused on taking down an evil power and preventing a dimensional collapse before it destroys their own universe.</p><p>Thankfully, if you want a shot at playing the game tomorrow, the game&apos;s system requirements are not monstrous, depending on what graphics setting you want to play at. For the bare minimum experience, you don&apos;t even need an SSD to play, with the minimum requirement demanding 75GB of hard drive space. But if you want to play the game at any of the higher settings, especially the RT settings, you&apos;ll need a modern Intel/AMD hexa core CPU based system with an RTX 3060 Ti/RTX 3070 class GPUs at a minimum to turn most of the eye candy on.</p><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/XDf5PcNM.html" id="XDf5PcNM" title="How To Choose A Graphics Card" width="960" height="540" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ AMD's China-Only Radeon RX 7900 GRE 16GB Debuts: Navi 31 with Cut-Down Memory ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-radeon-rx-7900-gre-debuts</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ AMD's Radeon RX 79000 GRE comes with 16GB of memory and a cut-down memory interface. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">amNV4MvXa57NNjU2eCygCG</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/P5XjPjmnLtXRnNynLc38GB-1280-80.png" type="image/png" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sun, 23 Jul 2023 19:20:12 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:45:11 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ ashilov@gmail.com (Anton Shilov) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Anton Shilov ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uMZ5kNphxA2Ut6whdLaSQV.png ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Anton Shilov has been in the PC industry since 1990s playing games, building PCs, and writing stories about pretty much everything that relates to PCs, Macs, smartphones, tablets, and even fab equipment. Over his career, he has worked at a variety of high-ranking websites, including AnandTech, EE Times, TechRadar, X-bit labs, and now Tom&#039;s Hardware. When Anton is not reading or writing about something high-tech, he is probably watching a good movie, playing a video game, or spending time with his family.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/png" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/P5XjPjmnLtXRnNynLc38GB-1280-80.png">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[@wxnod/Twitter]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Sapphire]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Sapphire]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Sapphire]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/P5XjPjmnLtXRnNynLc38GB-1280-80.png" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>AMD&apos;s partners are beginning to roll-out the company&apos;s Radeon RX 7900 GRE graphics cards that will be available exclusively in China and will offer a cheaper alternative to the Radeon RX 7900 XT. <a href="https://twitter.com/wxnod/status/1683147601582120961">@wxnod</a> has just published pictures of Sapphire&apos;s Radeon RX 7900 GRE, whereas <a href="https://scrubwiki.com/amd-radeon-rx-7900-gre-golden-rabbit-edition-specs-are-leaked/">ScrubWiki</a> revealed its specifications, which are quite surprising.</p><p> As it turns out, China-exclusive Radeon RX 7900 GRE is based on the Navi 31 GPU with 5376 stream processors enabled and running at 1.50 GHz – 2.40 GHz, which is the same configuration as that of the Radeon RX 7900 XT. There is one important difference though. The Radeon RX 7900 GRE disables one more memory controller die (MCD) and therefore comes with 16GB of GDDR6 memory along with a 256-bit memory interface. </p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gbReXV4UeRZAncohpimNwB.jpeg" alt="Sapphire" /><figcaption><small role="credit">@wxnod/Twitter</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XmYoziKEK7goaun5SV5mVB.jpeg" alt="Sapphire" /><figcaption><small role="credit">@wxnod/Twitter</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oNYNWA85Y6KwJpoqxF6rpB.png" alt="Sapphire" /><figcaption><small role="credit">@wxnod/Twitter</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p><br></p><p>As a result, AMD&apos;s Radeon RX 7900 GRE can boast the same 32 FP32 TFLOPS – 51.6 FP32 TFLOPS (base – boost) compute horsepower as the Radeon RX 7900 XT, yet it only has 64MB of Infinity Cache (with bandwidth reduced to 2.56 GB/s) as well as 16GB of memory (with bandwidth reduced to 640 MB/s).</p><p>It remains to be seen how AMD&apos;s Radeon RX 7900 GRE performs in real-world applications, but it is logical to presume that its performance will be similar to that of the Radeon RX 7900 XT in cases where compute horsepower matters and will be noticeably lower in cases where memory bandwidth is required. In general, the Radeon RX 7900 GRE should be significantly behind the Radeon RX 7900 XT in high resolutions and/or in cases where sophisticated antialiasing algorithms are enabled.</p><p><br></p><div ><table><caption>AMD and Nvidia Ada GPU Specifications</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " >Graphics Card</th><th  >RX 7900 XTX</th><th  >RX 7900 XT</th><th  >RX 7900 GRE</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " >Architecture</td><td  >Navi 31</td><td  >Navi 31</td><td  >Navi 31</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >CUs / SMs</td><td  >96</td><td  >84</td><td  >84</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >GPU Shaders</td><td  >6144</td><td  >5376</td><td  >5376</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Ray Tracing Units</td><td  >96</td><td  >84</td><td  >84</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Boost Clock (MHz)</td><td  >2500</td><td  >2400</td><td  >2400</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >VRAM Speed (Gbps)</td><td  >20</td><td  >20</td><td  >20</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >VRAM (GB)</td><td  >24</td><td  >20</td><td  >20</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >VRAM Bus Width</td><td  >384</td><td  >320</td><td  >256</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >L2 Cache</td><td  >96</td><td  >80</td><td  >64</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >ROPs</td><td  >192</td><td  >192</td><td  >192</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >TMUs</td><td  >384</td><td  >336</td><td  >336 (?)</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >TFLOPS FP32</td><td  >61.4</td><td  >51.6</td><td  >51.6</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >TFLOPS FP16 (FP8/INT8)</td><td  >123 (123)</td><td  >103 (103)</td><td  >103 (103)</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Bandwidth (GBps)</td><td  >960</td><td  >800</td><td  >640</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >TBP (watts)</td><td  >355</td><td  >315</td><td  >circa 300</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Launch Date</td><td  >Dec-22</td><td  >Dec-22</td><td  >July-23</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Launch Price</td><td  >$999 </td><td  >$899 </td><td  >?</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>When it comes to Sapphire&apos;s Nitro+ Radeon RX 7900 GRE, this graphics board features two eight-pin auxiliary PCIe power connectors and is rated for around 300W thermal graphics power (TGP). To cool down the rather hot Navi 31 GRE GPU, Sapphire uses a rather large 2.5-wide triple-fan cooling system, which is considerably thinner than the company uses on its <a href="https://www.sapphiretech.com/en/consumer/nitro-radeon-rx-7900-xt-vaporx-20g-gddr6">Nitro+ Radeon RX 7900 XT</a>.</p><p>Perhaps the most intriguing part about AMD&apos;s Radeon RX 7900 GRE is its price. It should naturally be cheaper compared to the Radeon RX 7900 XT, but for now we can only wonder how much cheaper it is.</p><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/SzkW6ASo.html" id="SzkW6ASo" title="Buy the Right Graphics Card" width="1920" height="1080" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel's Never-Released Arc A580 Purportedly Gets Benchmarked ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-never-released-arc-a580-benchmarked</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Intel's supposed Arc A580 graphics card gets tested in a cross-platform benchmark. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">4uFPEaYVYjCq9HKWRWeGuj</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/773mJW9agZ5b85ibeHapL8-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sat, 22 Jul 2023 15:10:46 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:41:34 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ ashilov@gmail.com (Anton Shilov) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Anton Shilov ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uMZ5kNphxA2Ut6whdLaSQV.png ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Anton Shilov has been in the PC industry since 1990s playing games, building PCs, and writing stories about pretty much everything that relates to PCs, Macs, smartphones, tablets, and even fab equipment. Over his career, he has worked at a variety of high-ranking websites, including AnandTech, EE Times, TechRadar, X-bit labs, and now Tom&#039;s Hardware. When Anton is not reading or writing about something high-tech, he is probably watching a good movie, playing a video game, or spending time with his family.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/773mJW9agZ5b85ibeHapL8-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Intel Arc]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel Arc]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel Arc]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/773mJW9agZ5b85ibeHapL8-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>When Intel presented its lineup of Arc A-series graphics cards for desktops last year, the company announced four graphics cards: the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-arc-alchemist-release-date-specs-pricing-all-we-know">Arc A770, Arc A750, Arc A580, and Arc A380</a>. But for an unknown reason, the Arc A580, based on a cut-down ACM-G10 GPU, has never made it to market. But someone with access to an alleged Arc A580 graphics card has not only <a href="https://gfxbench.com/device.jsp?benchmark=gfx50&os=Windows&api=vulkan&D=Intel%28R%29+Arc%28TM%29+A580+Graphics&testgroup=info">tested it in GFXBench 5.0</a> (via <a href="https://twitter.com/KOMACHI_ENSAKA/status/1682560819438174208">@Komachi_Ensaka</a>) but also uploaded its performance numbers to the database. As with any unofficial benchmarks, take the numbers with a grain of salt. </p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " >null</td><td  >Arc A380</td><td  >Arc A580</td><td  >Arc A770</td><td  >GeForce RTX 3050</td><td  >GeForce RTX 3060 Ti </td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Onscreen</td><td  >?</td><td  >157.2</td><td  >710.1</td><td  >402.8</td><td  >736.6 </td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen</td><td  >?</td><td  >603.6</td><td  >768.5</td><td  >420.7</td><td  >765.7 </td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Aztec Ruins High Tier Onscreen</td><td  >46.4</td><td  >103.4</td><td  >501.1</td><td  >275.4</td><td  >478.6 </td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen</td><td  >106.8</td><td  >242.3</td><td  >330.3</td><td  >169.3</td><td  >304.5</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>The alleged Intel Arc A580 was tested in GFXBench 5.0 with a Vulkan-based renderer. The results look odd compared to Intel&apos;s Arc A770, as the unreleased device is massively behind. This could be due to any number of things, like immature drivers for an unreleased product, certain hardware or software problems, or the results could be fake. However, at least the device outperforms Intel&apos;s Arc A380 by a noticeable margin. </p><p>It should be noted that GFXBench — a cross-platform graphics benchmark designed to test everything from smartphones to high-end gaming desktops — is not the best way to determine the performance of desktop PC hardware, both because it does not test advanced capabilities of modern GPUs, like real-time ray tracing, and because it cannot push high-end graphics cards to their limits. </p><p>Intel&apos;s Arc A580 graphics card was meant to use the ACM-G10 graphics processor with only 3072 stream processors enabled and equipped with 8GB of memory. The product would sit below Intel&apos;s Arc A770 (4096 SPs) and Arc A750 (3584 SPs) and serve as the company&apos;s cheapest solution for gamers. Since Intel planned to use severely cut-down ACM-G10 GPUs for the product, it would probably be able to supply a boatload of such graphics cards, but for some reason, it decided not to launch it. That&apos;s possibly because the higher-end A770 and A750 can barely compete against midrange offerings from AMD and Nvidia.</p><p>It is hard to guess whether the publication of the benchmark is meant to show that Intel still plans to proceed with its launch, offering an ultra-cheap solution for gamers, or that someone is just playing with a pre-production sample. Of course, we also cannot exclude the possibility that the results are just simply fake.</p><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/XDf5PcNM.html" id="XDf5PcNM" title="How To Choose A Graphics Card" width="960" height="540" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Strives to Make Path Tracing Usable on Integrated GPUs ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-trying-to-make-path-tracing-usable-on-integrated-gpus</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Intel is presenting several new papers to three universities focusing on optimizing path-tracing performance, to the point where integrated GPUs could run path-tracing in real-time. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">S7zmXfnATj9VGwwfUGzbLc</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BJEtQhhASFS9o9rSWBVbgi-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Mon, 03 Jul 2023 20:35:15 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:42:58 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Aaron Klotz) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Aaron Klotz ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aAk2saHqkgFuTCanz8LnmD.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Aaron began building computers back when he was 8 years old in the mid-2000s, and it’s been a hobby of his ever since then. With a focus on computer hardware, he became an avid member of the Tom’s Hardware forums several years later, helping people solve issues with their PCs. He is now a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware, writing about computer hardware news and more. When not busy playing or writing about computer hardware, he spends his free time playing video games like Star Citizen or Apex Legends.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BJEtQhhASFS9o9rSWBVbgi-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Nvidia]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Nvidia RTX and DLSS ]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Nvidia RTX and DLSS ]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Nvidia RTX and DLSS ]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BJEtQhhASFS9o9rSWBVbgi-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>A <a href="https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/news/gpu-research-generative-ai-update.html">new article</a> from Intel explains the latest advances in path-traced light simulation and neural graphics research that its engineers have been working on. One of the biggest improvements Intel is striving toward is far more efficient path-traced rendering, which could enable integrated GPUs to run path-tracing in real time.</p><p>The article links to three new papers advertising new path-traced optimizations that will be presented at SIGGRAPH, EGSR, and HPG by the Intel Graphics Research Organization. These optimizations are designed to alleviate and improve GPU performance by reducing the number of calculations required to simulate light bounces.</p><p>The first paper shown presents a new method of computing reflections on a GGX microfacet surface. GGX is a graphics technology that allows computers to capture simulated light bounces that are reflected in different directions. With this new method, materials are "reduced" to a hemispherical mirror that is substantially more simple to simulate.</p><p>The second paper shows off a more efficient method of rendering glittery surfaces in a 3D environment. According to Intel, simulating glittery surfaces is an "open challenge." However, with this new method, the average number of visible glitter from each pixel can be taken into account. That way, the GPU only needs to render the correct amount of visible glitter visible to the eye.</p><p>Finally, another paper presents a more efficient method of constructing photo trajectories in different illumination scenarios, known as Markov Chain Mixture Models for Real-Time Direct Illumination. The explanation is very complex, but the end result is a more efficient rendering technique to output complex direct illumination in real time.</p><p>These three techniques obviously aren&apos;t going to guarantee that integrated GPUs will be able to run path-tracing smoothly. But they are aimed at improving the core aspects of path tracing, including ray tracing, shading, and sampling, which will help improve real-time path tracing performance on integrated GPUs (as well as discrete GPUs), according to Intel.</p><p>Getting real-time light simulation to work on integrated GPUs effectively would be a huge milestone. Even though real-time ray tracing has technically been around since 2018, it still takes a massive amount of processing power to run. Most of the world&apos;s <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">Best GPUs</a> still can&apos;t operate most modern AAA games at 60FPS at high resolutions with ray-tracing graphics enabled. If Intel can get path tracing to work well on its own integrated graphics solutions, it would take the tech mainstream and make light simulation easier to run on discrete GPUs as well.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Nvidia Shares GeForce RTX 4060 Performance Numbers ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-shares-geforce-rtx-4060-performance-numbers</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Nvidia's own benchmark results suggest that GeForce RTX 4060 is faster than GeForce RTX 3060 even without frame generation. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">kTkjhQmcf8c6o2M852Lvqd</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z8DKRGxdKnAo499o8GNdGV-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jun 2023 20:45:18 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:53:24 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ ashilov@gmail.com (Anton Shilov) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Anton Shilov ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uMZ5kNphxA2Ut6whdLaSQV.png ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Anton Shilov has been in the PC industry since 1990s playing games, building PCs, and writing stories about pretty much everything that relates to PCs, Macs, smartphones, tablets, and even fab equipment. Over his career, he has worked at a variety of high-ranking websites, including AnandTech, EE Times, TechRadar, X-bit labs, and now Tom&#039;s Hardware. When Anton is not reading or writing about something high-tech, he is probably watching a good movie, playing a video game, or spending time with his family.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z8DKRGxdKnAo499o8GNdGV-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Nvidia]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Nvidia GeForce game ready driver update]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Nvidia GeForce game ready driver update]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Nvidia GeForce game ready driver update]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z8DKRGxdKnAo499o8GNdGV-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Nvidia has <a href="https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/geforce-rtx-4060-available-june-29/">published</a> official benchmark results of its upcoming GeForce RTX 4060 graphics card just a week ahead of its launch on June 29. The new $299 Ada Lovelace-based graphics card is shown to be across-the-board faster than its predecessor based on the Ampere architecture, but there is catch: the newcomer shows its most significant advantages with AI frame generation enabled. Without it, it is merely 20% faster, according to Nvidia.</p><p> </p><p><br></p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3137px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:45.33%;"><img id="b3uJ5MbWC5CkV2uuQBQGtV" name="geforce-rtx-4060-performance.png" alt="Nvidia" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/b3uJ5MbWC5CkV2uuQBQGtV.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="3137" height="1422" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/b3uJ5MbWC5CkV2uuQBQGtV.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Nvidia)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Nvidia&apos;s GeForce RTX 4060 graphics card is based on the AD106 GPU with 3072 CUDA cores enabled that has peak FP32 compute throughput of 15 TFLOPS, which is just 15% higher compared to GeForce RTX 3060 with its 13 FP32 TFLOPS. But the AD106 has noticeable advantages over GA106 in the form of massively improved ray tracing performance (+40%) and Tensor compute throughput (+137%). The latter can be used for AI, advanced DLSS 3 upscaling, and AI image generation workloads. We&apos;ll see if that&apos;s enough to make it one of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">best graphics cards</a>.</p><p><br></p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1849px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:94.48%;"><img id="4Xi2xhWeEbuG6dxWdMeSEK" name="geforce-rtx-4060-specifications.png" alt="Nvidia" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4Xi2xhWeEbuG6dxWdMeSEK.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1849" height="1747" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4Xi2xhWeEbuG6dxWdMeSEK.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Nvidia)</span></figcaption></figure><p>We can make guesses why Nvidia decided to balance its Ada Lovelace microarchitecture the way it balanced it, but it is obvious that the company will use benefits — DLSS 3 and AI image generation — that is has to outshine predecessors and competitors in games.</p><p>That said, it is not particularly surprising that Nvidia demonstrated its GeForce RTX 4060 with DLSS 3 and image generation enabled in as many games as possible, showing rather dramatic performance gains compared to its GeForce RTX 3060. This is indeed a major improvement of the new GeForce RTX 4060 graphics card as it can enable high framerates with all the eye candy enabled in the latest games, something the GeForce RTX 3060 just cannot do.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3383px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:59.80%;"><img id="kQah8cCyq7x95LyWSKodxJ" name="geforce-rtx-4060-gaming-performance-2.png" alt="Nvidia" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kQah8cCyq7x95LyWSKodxJ.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="3383" height="2023" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kQah8cCyq7x95LyWSKodxJ.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Nvidia)</span></figcaption></figure><p>The company admits that far not all games support AI frame generation and this is where its GeForce RTX 4060 is only 20% faster than its predecessor. A 20% improvement is still not bad, only it is just not something one would expect from a new generation product based on the all-new architecture. </p><p>Nvidia considers lower power consumption of its GeForce RTX 4060 as another advantage of its new board as it will allow to save some money. Yet, this advantage is less obvious than performance gains.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3538px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:32.50%;"><img id="dd7nno6QxCtbX8wBkBh3AK" name="geforce-rtx-4060-power-efficiency.png" alt="Nvidia" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dd7nno6QxCtbX8wBkBh3AK.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="3538" height="1150" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dd7nno6QxCtbX8wBkBh3AK.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Nvidia)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Leading graphics cards manufacturers like Asus, Colorful, Gainward, Galax, Gigabyte, Inno3D, KFA2, MSI, Palit, PNY, and Zotac will be releasing the GeForce RTX 4060 graphics cards starting June 29. Nvidia&apos;s recommended price for GeForce RTX 4060 boards is $299, but expect products that will carry different price tags as well.</p><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/SzkW6ASo.html" id="SzkW6ASo" title="Buy the Right Graphics Card" width="1920" height="1080" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Nvidia's H100 Hopper Compute GPU Benchmarked in Games, Found Lacking ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-h100-benchmarkedin-games</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Nvidia's H100 card tested in 3DMark, Red Dead Redemption 2, performs worse than integrated GPUs. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">QB445HUUhQRfX3yfcBBKD4</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vkoYB5GWjcGw7ARyRKLqSb-1280-80.png" type="image/png" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Mon, 19 Jun 2023 20:48:01 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 10:10:53 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ ashilov@gmail.com (Anton Shilov) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Anton Shilov ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uMZ5kNphxA2Ut6whdLaSQV.png ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Anton Shilov has been in the PC industry since 1990s playing games, building PCs, and writing stories about pretty much everything that relates to PCs, Macs, smartphones, tablets, and even fab equipment. Over his career, he has worked at a variety of high-ranking websites, including AnandTech, EE Times, TechRadar, X-bit labs, and now Tom&#039;s Hardware. When Anton is not reading or writing about something high-tech, he is probably watching a good movie, playing a video game, or spending time with his family.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/png" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vkoYB5GWjcGw7ARyRKLqSb-1280-80.png">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Nvidia]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Nvidia]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Nvidia]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Nvidia]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vkoYB5GWjcGw7ARyRKLqSb-1280-80.png" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Although compute GPUs like Nvidia&apos;s H100 formally belong to the category of graphics processing units, they can barely render graphics as they do not have enough special-purpose hardware. As it turns out Nvidia&apos;s H100, a card that costs over $30,000 performs worse than integrated GPUs in such benchmarks as 3DMark and Red Dead Redemption 2, as discovered by <a href="https://youtu.be/-nb_DZAH-TM">Geekerwan</a>.</p><p>Nvidia&apos;s H100 card is based on the company&apos;s GH100 processor with 14,592 CUDA cores that support a variety of data formats used for AI and HPC workloads, including FP64, TF32, FP32, FP16, INT8, and FP8. By contrast, Nvidia&apos;s consumer GPUs, such as Nvidia&apos;s AD102, only properly support FP32. Meanwhile, GH100 only has 24 raster operating (ROPs) units and does not have display engines or display outputs. Furthermore, Nvidia does not optimize Hopper drivers for gaming applications. </p><p>But apparently it is still possible to make Nvidia&apos;s H100 render graphics and even support ray tracing. Only it renders graphics rather slowly. One H100 board scores 2681 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is even slower than performance of AMD&apos;s integrated Radeon 680M, which scores 2710.</p><p>But running games on a card that costs over $30,000 does not make a lot of sense and Nvidia certainly did not design GH100 for rendering graphics. While Nvidia&apos;s GH100 has some graphics specific hardware inside, it is not made to offer any substantial performance in games, which is why it is slower than AMD&apos;s integrated Radeon 680M.</p><p>Although Nvidia&apos;s flagship compute GPU is not meant for graphics, it <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-publishes-mlperf-30-performance-of-h100-l4">outperforms everything in datacenter AI and HPC applications</a> and this is exactly what it is made for.</p><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/SzkW6ASo.html" id="SzkW6ASo" title="Buy the Right Graphics Card" width="1920" height="1080" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse Review: Quiet a Performance ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sapphire-rx-7900-xt-pulse-review</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ The Sapphire RX 7900 XT can't outperform AMD's reference design, but it runs quieter and now costs under $800, and you still get 20GB of VRAM. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">gJE5HXhkUNXDJYBWF7Vow6</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CiHbPDMhqNgyhcP4hJUeyi-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Mon, 19 Jun 2023 19:00:18 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:49:16 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jarred Walton ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8uFgSGcCzKdFTTQdqonCPi.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jarred&#039;s love of computers dates back to the dark ages, when his dad brought home a DOS 2.3 PC and he left his C-64 behind. He eventually built his first custom PC in 1990 with a 286 12MHz, only to discover it was already woefully outdated when Wing Commander released a few months later. He holds a BS in Computer Science from Brigham Young University and has been working as a tech journalist since 2004, writing for AnandTech, Maximum PC, and PC Gamer. From the first S3 Virge &#039;3D decelerators&#039; to today&#039;s GPUs, Jarred keeps up with all the latest graphics trends and is the one to ask about game performance.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CiHbPDMhqNgyhcP4hJUeyi-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Tom&#039;s Hardware]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse photos and unboxing]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse photos and unboxing]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse photos and unboxing]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CiHbPDMhqNgyhcP4hJUeyi-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Last December, AMD launched the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top">Radeon RX 7900 XTX and 7900 XT</a>. At the time, we noted that the price gap was far too narrow to warrant getting the "lesser" card. Since then, online prices have dropped over $100, with the Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse we&apos;re looking at today being one of the prime options. The RX 7900 XT ranks as one of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">best graphics cards</a>, and Sapphire looks to improve on the reference card with a larger form factor and better cooling... or at least quieter cooling.<br><br>All of the core specs remain unchanged, so you get the same <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-rdna-3-gpu-architecture-deep-dive-the-ryzen-moment-for-gpus">AMD RDNA 3 GPU architecture</a>, with a healthy 20GB of GDDR6 20Gbps memory. That&apos;s 67% more VRAM than Nvidia&apos;s similarly priced <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-review-a-costly-70-class-gpu">RTX 4070 Ti</a>. Performance, as you might expect, remains largely unchanged. That&apos;s true of most third-party graphics cards, since at most you typically get a 3–5 percent factory overclock. In the case of the RX 7900 XT Pulse, it&apos;s a 2.1% factory overclock, with a 5.1% increase in TBP (total board power).<br><br>Here&apos;s the quick overview of the specs table for the Sapphire card along with some competing GPUs.</p><div ><table><caption>AMD and Nvidia GPU Specifications</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><strong>Graphics Card</strong></th><th  >RX 7900 XT Sapphire</th><th  >RX 7900 XT</th><th  >RX 7900 XTX</th><th  >RX 6950 XT</th><th  >RTX 4080</th><th  >RTX 4070 Ti</th><th  >RTX 4070</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Architecture</strong></td><td  >Navi 31</td><td  >Navi 31</td><td  >Navi 31</td><td  >Navi 21</td><td  >AD103</td><td  >AD104</td><td  >AD104</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Process Technology</strong></td><td  >TSMC N5 + N6</td><td  >TSMC N5 + N6</td><td  >TSMC N5 + N6</td><td  >TSMC N7</td><td  >TSMC 4N</td><td  >TSMC 4N</td><td  >TSMC 4N</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Transistors (Billion)</strong></td><td  >45.6 + 5x 2.05</td><td  >45.6 + 5x 2.05</td><td  >45.6 + 6x 2.05</td><td  >26.8</td><td  >45.9</td><td  >35.8</td><td  >32</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Die size (mm^2)</strong></td><td  >300 + 225</td><td  >300 + 225</td><td  >300 + 225</td><td  >519</td><td  >378.6</td><td  >294.5</td><td  >294.5</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>CUs / SMs</strong></td><td  >84</td><td  >84</td><td  >96</td><td  >80</td><td  >76</td><td  >60</td><td  >46</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>GPU Cores (Shaders)</strong></td><td  >5376</td><td  >5376</td><td  >6144</td><td  >5120</td><td  >9728</td><td  >7680</td><td  >5888</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Tensor / AI Cores</strong></td><td  >168</td><td  >168</td><td  >192</td><td  >N/A</td><td  >304</td><td  >240</td><td  >184</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Ray Tracing "Cores"</strong></td><td  >84</td><td  >84</td><td  >96</td><td  >80</td><td  >76</td><td  >60</td><td  >46</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Boost Clock (MHz)</strong></td><td  >2450</td><td  >2400</td><td  >2500</td><td  >2310</td><td  >2505</td><td  >2610</td><td  >2475</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>VRAM Speed (Gbps)</strong></td><td  >20</td><td  >20</td><td  >20</td><td  >18</td><td  >22.4</td><td  >21</td><td  >21</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>VRAM (GB)</strong></td><td  >20</td><td  >20</td><td  >24</td><td  >16</td><td  >16</td><td  >12</td><td  >12</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>VRAM Bus Width</strong></td><td  >320</td><td  >320</td><td  >384</td><td  >256</td><td  >256</td><td  >192</td><td  >192</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>L2 / Infinity Cache</strong></td><td  >80</td><td  >80</td><td  >96</td><td  >128</td><td  >64</td><td  >48</td><td  >36</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>ROPs</strong></td><td  >192</td><td  >192</td><td  >192</td><td  >128</td><td  >112</td><td  >80</td><td  >64</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>TMUs</strong></td><td  >336</td><td  >336</td><td  >384</td><td  >320</td><td  >304</td><td  >240</td><td  >184</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>TFLOPS FP32 (Boost)</strong></td><td  >52.7</td><td  >51.6</td><td  >61.4</td><td  >23.7</td><td  >48.7</td><td  >40.1</td><td  >29.1</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>TFLOPS FP16 (FP8)</strong></td><td  >105.4</td><td  >103.2</td><td  >122.8</td><td  >47.4</td><td  >390 (780)</td><td  >321 (641)</td><td  >233 (466)</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Bandwidth (GBps)</strong></td><td  >800</td><td  >800</td><td  >960</td><td  >576</td><td  >717</td><td  >504</td><td  >504</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>TBP/TGP (watts)</strong></td><td  >331</td><td  >315</td><td  >355</td><td  >335</td><td  >320</td><td  >285</td><td  >200</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Launch Date</strong></td><td  >Dec 2022</td><td  >Dec 2022</td><td  >Dec 2022</td><td  >May 2022</td><td  >Nov 2022</td><td  >Jan 2023</td><td  >Apr 2023</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Launch Price</strong></td><td  >$899</td><td  >$899</td><td  >$999</td><td  >$1,099</td><td  >$1,199</td><td  >$799</td><td  >$599</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Online Price</strong></td><td  ><strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=RX+7900+XT+Sapphire&rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3J284822" target="_blank">779.99</a></strong></td><td  ><strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=RX+7900+XT&rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3J284822" target="_blank">779.99</a></strong></td><td  ><strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=RX+7900+XTX&rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3J284822" target="_blank">979.99</a></strong></td><td  ><strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=RX+6950+XT&rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3J284822" target="_blank">629.99</a></strong></td><td  ><strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=RTX+4080&rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3J284822" target="_blank">1107.99</a></strong></td><td  ><strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=RTX+4070+Ti&rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3J284822" target="_blank">789.99</a></strong></td><td  ><strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=RTX+4070&rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3J284822" target="_blank">584.99</a></strong></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>We already noted the only differences in core specs between the Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse and the reference 7900 XT: GPU boost clock and TBP/TGP. Those are the paper specs, however, and there are other differences in terms of card design, aesthetics, and other aspects.<br><br>Right now, Sapphire is one of the three least expensive RX 7900 XT cards available, the others being the <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BNLSDRKB">XFX RX 7900 XT</a> that uses AMD&apos;s reference design — an MBA or "Made By AMD" card — and the <a href="https://www.newegg.com/asrock-radeon-rx-7900-xt-rx7900xt-pg-20go/p/N82E16814930083">ASRock RX 7900 XT Phantom Gaming OC</a>. They all cost $779.99, though Sapphire and ASRock cards require an instant rebate at Newegg to get there.<br><br>Several other 7900 XT models are available for around $800, while the most expensive options right now can cost as much as an RX 7900 XTX (around $950). Unless you <em>really</em> love the aesthetic of one of those premium cards, we&apos;d recommend stepping up to the faster AMD XTX GPU rather than paying $200 extra, but that&apos;s ultimately an individual choice.<br><br>Looking at the primary competition, the Nvidia RTX 4070 Ti only comes with 12GB of VRAM, but it also has a lower TGP and gives you the typical Nvidia extras: DLSS, Frame Generation, tensor cores, and improved ray tracing hardware. We&apos;ll get to the performance results shortly, but in our current test suite, it&apos;s the usual story: Similar overall native resolution performance, AMD leads in rasterization and Nvidia leads in ray tracing.</p><h2 id="sapphire-rx-7900-xt-pulse">Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9U98YmDByCBmPH5WF8h5pk.jpg" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse photos and unboxing" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bGQxCzgrjxWZWKmFzwR2xk.jpg" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse photos and unboxing" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ASWRxVaftapewcKSfFJw9m.jpg" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse photos and unboxing" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jtyfTJcKv7proTQK2BHLLm.jpg" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse photos and unboxing" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KaexrGBJhiWG57yarkZPVm.jpg" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse photos and unboxing" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AJnCVA94tdJn2EKuLHgDZk.jpg" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse photos and unboxing" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Sapphire&apos;s Pulse cards represent the base model designs from the company, with no extras like RGB lighting. You do get a support bracket for the card, though this sort of bracket tends to be far less user-friendly than the "kickstands" provided with some other GPUs. On the other hand, the support bracket screws into the case, so it won&apos;t shift around if you happen to carry your PC into a different room.<br><br>The Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse is a relatively large card at 313x134x53 mm. It&apos;s a triple-slot card for all intents and purposes — even if it&apos;s technically only a "2.7-slot" design, you can&apos;t really fit anything in that third overlapped slot. It weighs 1417g as well, which isn&apos;t too bad given the dimensions. For comparison, the reference AMD 7900 XT card measures 276x113x51.5 mm and weighs 1490g.<br><br>AMD&apos;s card is quite a bit more compact, but that also tends to impact cooling performance and noise levels, which is arguably the biggest draw for Sapphire&apos;s Pulse model. We&apos;ll get into the details on temperatures and noise later in the the review.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3cidS453Ltwj3vq4bxYf9j.jpg" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse photos and unboxing" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CiHbPDMhqNgyhcP4hJUeyi.jpg" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse photos and unboxing" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tRnYdTfwFZPRdq9ssdTxsj.jpg" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse photos and unboxing" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gvjdrY3D5WDjMgnM9jaY7k.jpg" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse photos and unboxing" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/g34JYBB6nq8z3KnDaJd4Jk.jpg" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse photos and unboxing" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/P7cR7ndxwsEhWYZydjuJRk.jpg" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse photos and unboxing" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zzxeSzA9Sgsdifmc4cuMhk.jpg" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse photos and unboxing" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AJnCVA94tdJn2EKuLHgDZk.jpg" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse photos and unboxing" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>As you&apos;d expect for a >300W graphics card, you get triple fans to go along with the large dimensions. Sapphire&apos;s latest designs use "angular velocity blade" fans, which are supposed to move more air and last longer than previous Sapphire designs. Sapphire notes that the inclusion of the outer rim helps to improve downward air pressure, by up to 44%, with 19% more airflow. The fans are also 95mm in diameter, compared to AMD&apos;s reference design that uses 78mm fans.<br><br>The radiator has six heatpipes to help carry heat away from the GPU core and VRAM, which again represents a typical design for graphics cards with a 300W or higher TBP rating. The only real improvement would be to opt for a full vapor chamber instead of heatpipes, and that&apos;s something the Made By AMD cards use.<br><br>Video connectivity consists of dual HDMI 2.1 ports and dual DisplayPort 2.1 UHBR13.5 ports. The HDMI ports have a peak bandwidth of 48 Gbps while the DP2.1 ports offer up 54 Gbps of bandwidth. Uncompressed resolution support for AMD&apos;s latest RDNA 3 GPUs tops out at 4K and 229 Hz on DP2.1, while DSC (Display Stream Compression) can provide "visually lossless" 4K at up to 480 Hz. Do note that we&apos;re nowhere near getting 480 Hz 4K displays, however, with the fastest options right now being 240 Hz models.</p><h2 id="sapphire-rx-7900-xt-test-setup">Sapphire RX 7900 XT Test Setup</h2><p>Our graphics card test system was updated earlier this year to use Intel&apos;s fastest Core i9-13900K, with all the bells and whistles. We tested the Sapphire RX 7900 XT card using AMD&apos;s most recent 23.5.2 drivers, while the other AMD cards were tested with 23.3.2 through 23.5.1. All the cards in this review have been retested in the past month or two, without <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-vbs-harms-performance-rtx-4090">Windows 11&apos;s Virtualization Based Security</a> enabled.</p><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">Test Equipment</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text"><strong>TOM&apos;S HARDWARE INTEL 13TH GEN PC<br><br></strong><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BCF54SR1">Intel Core i9-13900K</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BL8JC76Q">MSI MEG Z790 Ace DDR5</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09Z1SRR22">G.Skill Trident Z5 2x16GB DDR5-6600 CL34</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BJ1283X8">Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus-G 4TB</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/quiet-Titanium-Regulation-Graphics-Individually/dp/B0C6FY4JXF">be quiet! 1600W Dark Power Pro 13</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BGR9213C">Cooler Master PL360 Flux</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-11-everything-you-need-to-know">Windows 11 Pro 64-bit</a><br><br><strong>GRAPHICS CARDS</strong><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/Sapphire-11323-02-20G-Radeon-Gaming-Graphics/dp/B0BR6L7TKR">Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/Sapphire-21322-01-20G-Radeon-Gaming-Graphics/dp/B0BMM9F62S">AMD RX 7900 XTX</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/XFX-Speedster-MERC310-Graphics-RX-79TMERCU9/dp/B0BNLT17XQ">AMD RX 7900 XT</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/PowerColor-Devil-Radeon-Graphics-Memory/dp/B09VYDTVGY">AMD RX 6950 XT</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+RX+6900+XT&rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822">AMD RX 6900 XT</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/MSI-Radeon-RX-6800-16G/dp/B09S596QVD">AMD RX 6800 XT</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.newegg.com/sapphire-radeon-rx-6800-11305-02-20g/p/N82E16814202394">AMD RX 6800</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/MSI-Tri-Frozr-Lovelace-Architecture-Graphics/dp/B0BL668N1X">Nvidia RTX 4080</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/ZOTAC-Graphics-IceStorm-Advanced-ZT-D40710J-10P/dp/B0BQCVTSR3">Nvidia RTX 4070 Ti</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/ZOTAC-Gaming-GeForce-4070-Spider-Man/dp/B0C3T5V2W1">Nvidia RTX 4070</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/ZOTAC-Gaming-GeForce-4060-Spider-Man/dp/B0C5S5F9F5">Nvidia RTX 4060 Ti</a></p></div></div><p>Our initial review of the RX 7900 XT looked at performance across all resolutions and settings that we normally test (1080p medium, 1080p ultra, 1440p ultra, and 4K ultra). It also had professional and AI benchmarks. For third-party cards like this Sapphire Pulse, we&apos;ll limit our testing to 1440p and 4K ultra, as that&apos;s the primary target for graphics cards that cost $800 or more. Results in other tests should have similar margins to the gaming results.<br><br>Our test PC includes an MSI Z790 DDR5 motherboard, G.Skill DDR5 memory, and a Sabrent 4TB SSD — which we promptly filled to about half its total capacity. be quiet! also supplied us with its new 1600W Dark Power Pro 13 80 Plus Titanium rated power supply. That would have been overkill, back before cards like the RTX 4090 were a thing.<br><br>We&apos;re including a collection of current and previous generation GPUs, with the Nvidia results from the RTX 40-series (but skipping the significantly more expensive RTX 4090). If you want to see how the RX 7900 XT stacks up against other GPUs, check out our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html">GPU benchmarks hierarchy</a>.<br><br>We have Nvidia PCAT v2 (Power Capture and Analysis Tool) hardware as well, which means we can grab real power use, GPU clocks, and more during all of our gaming benchmarks. We&apos;ll have most of the details for power testing in a few pages.</p><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/XDf5PcNM.html" id="XDf5PcNM" title="How To Choose A Graphics Card" width="960" height="540" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe><ul><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html"><strong>Best Graphics Cards</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html"><strong>GPU Benchmarks and Hierarchy</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/graphics"><strong>All Graphics Content</strong></a></li></ul><p>We have 1440p and 4K ultra benchmarks for this Sapphire RX 7900 XT review. Given the $799 typical price (with sales bringing it down to $779), we&apos;ll start with the 1440p ultra performance before moving on to the 4K gaming results.<br><br>Here&apos;s the overview, first with the 15-game full suite, and with separate rasterization-only and DXR-only (i.e. ray tracing) charts. We&apos;ll discuss the individual game results further down the page.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rGHyB8r5VooJStWxgtVJAn.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sPyCT83D9CsL3pdpcan2Qn.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eWjzgSvsnzfuFTuheaqYdn.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>First, overall performance ends up exactly tied (a 0.1 fps difference) with the reference RX 7900 XT. It&apos;s interesting, because we&apos;ve seen other tests of Sapphire&apos;s card where it&apos;s a couple of percent faster. That&apos;s what we&apos;d normally expect, since it has a higher power limit and a minor factory overclock, but there&apos;s always a bit of variability between GPUs.<br><br>Maybe our sample card was a bit of a dud, or maybe our reference card is a bit better than typical. It&apos;s not drivers, either, as we previously tested the card with the same drivers that we used for our most recent reference GPU testing. Regardless, there&apos;s really nothing to worry about as no one would notice a less than 10% difference without running benchmarks.<br><br>The Sapphire card also lands between the RX 6950 XT and RTX 4070 Ti in performance, but here we need to look at the rasterization and ray tracing charts as well. AMD&apos;s GPU ends up slightly ahead of the 4070 Ti in rasterization performance with a 6% lead, but conversely ends up trailing by 19% in the DXR (DirectX Raytracing) test suite.<br><br>That&apos;s expected in general, and how much you want to weight rasterization versus ray tracing performance is a contentious subject. Some will argue ray tracing is just technical snake oil, others hail it as the next big thing for graphics. There are currently close to 150 games that have some form of ray tracing. That&apos;s the "good" news.<br><br>Subjectively, however, we&apos;d say probably only fifteen or so rate as reasonably popular games where the RT effects make a noticeable difference. Not coincidentally, six of those games are in our test suite. We&apos;d also say that good upscaling (DLSS, XeSS, or one of the better FSR2 implementations) often ends up being more useful than token ray tracing support.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/t7P6V9i5kUvo3JwNhwQhD.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Gj4QARSMh6eSvs8rqBm93.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QujprjuqfgRa6aCKDmaxQ.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/V95Vq7px7G3GMbdV4sXBd.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/keEEMXrEvK8esYRphFmwo.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tbBxHhdXpJ6fbBkZqhRZz.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/g3xYMAmHMEBdkXeebE6z63.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/S4CwHhKBfUicgNbHzXnVZ3.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bnd4zoNqRhqPLGfyfGG7q3.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mUfhNGBrASTfi9R74JMUC4.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/B8QN5M539Z3YXakLMJJhpP.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dsXPnenDCco8jSWbTwkeJ4.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZFz32Gjo9gXBnQJyFus7v3.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8GV4bo5es95SAf7qVTNuZ4.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LpbcFxwUJW575v5bU46Xm4.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Across our 15-game test suite, the Sapphire and reference 7900 XT cards are basically equivalent, with a spread of -2.2% to +4.3% for the Sapphire card. <em>Forza Horizon 5</em> shows the biggest change, and that could be due to drivers or a recent game patch. Everything else is within margin of error.<br><br>Switching gears to the Sapphire versus RTX 4070 Ti, we&apos;ll split that up into rasterization and ray tracing games. The spread for rasterization ends up ranging from -7.2% (<em>Total War: Warhammer 3</em>) to +25.9% (<em>Borderlands 3</em>) in favor of Sapphire. DXR meanwhile is a clean sweep for Nvidia, with anywhere from a 10.3% (<em>Metro Exodus Enhanced</em>) to a 57.1% (<em>Minecraft</em>) lead for Nvidia. Not surprisingly, but the most demanding DXR games are the ones that favor Nvidia the most. Those are also the games where ray tracing makes the most noticeable visual difference.</p><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/XDf5PcNM.html" id="XDf5PcNM" title="How To Choose A Graphics Card" width="960" height="540" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe><ul><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html"><strong>Best Graphics Cards</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html"><strong>GPU Benchmarks and Hierarchy</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/graphics"><strong>All Graphics Content</strong></a></li></ul><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TSjtvkAzs9A3ft8pamDAGn.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YvwHReJiFgWWusBv7ZbMXn.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HJ3jQ9W3mGfEUqywTt8xjn.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>The standings don&apos;t change much with our 4K ultra test results, though AMD does close the gap with the RTX 4070 Ti just a touch. Overall, Sapphire ends up 3.4% slower than the RTX 4070 Ti, with a slightly larger lead in rasterization performance and a slightly worse loss in DXR performance. Specifically, it&apos;s 10.6% faster in our rasterization suite, and 21.2% slower in the DXR suite.<br><br>If you ever want a good reason for upscaling algorithms, 4K gaming will suffice. Not only can  you get quite good results when doing a modest 2x upscaling (e.g. going from 2715x1527 to 3840x2160). That&apos;s because the more data you have, the &apos;easier&apos; it is for AI and conventional algorithms to fill in the gaps.<br><br>Put another way, let&apos;s look at the extreme. Imagine a 2x upscale from 5x5 pixels to 7x7 pixels. The algorithm would need to interpolate from 25 total pixels to 49 total pixels, but there&apos;s simply not as much detail to start with. Conversely, when the target ends up being 8.3 million pixels interpolated from 4.1 pixels, there&apos;s a wealth of information available.<br><br>From a performance perspective, upscaling to hit 4K also has some great benefits. We explained <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/why-does-4k-gaming-require-so-much-vram">why 4K requires so much more VRAM</a> than 1440p or 1080p, and while games can do things in various ways, the end result is that rendering at 2K and then upscaling to 4K can result in some excellent performance gains with a relatively minimal loss in image fidelity. You&apos;re also not likely to be CPU limited when targeting 4K, which isn&apos;t always the case with upscaling to 1080p.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LJJaALRxDrp7ZxgUK5nVK.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iBvk45QoynyFe8s2HcVX8.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yeAKEbbcjLS24xJU8mWEW.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xvaBJ9Vn2YX8pzU7dMqci.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sSxtQ77rdSWy9hdg5RjNu.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/64RRm8iKV5jaE33CCYVpB3.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KNDmKr5bfjqJvhDRVXLdG3.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9qaz3R3D8qHnTKx4YSUPe3.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Z2fxoUko3FLKFrYpHCZcj3.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2BdTWzxhBV9Ls6pLpJUR74.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QgNxy4auAgadu649BD6ovn.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ATa2hTJ38iBHydJHZFYxP4.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WWmtmLwhnGTkoYkwZZVY24.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZwFrKUWRqY4gGDm9vUJwU4.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/f6p9spDtL5esFokug9PBg4.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Native 4K performance in our rasterization suite ranges from 48.9 fps in <em>A Plague Tale: Requiem</em> to 107.1 fps in <em>Far Cry 6</em>. Only two of the games failed to average 60 fps or more (though <em>Flight Simulator</em> barely got there). But with the Sapphire RX 7900 XT, or the RTX 4070 Ti, every rasterization game is very much playable, particularly if you drop from ultra to high settings.<br><br>For our DXR suite, things aren&apos;t quite so nice. Only <em>Spider-Man: Miles Morales</em> and <em>Metro Exodus Enhanced</em> can even break 30 fps at native 4K, and <em>Control</em> nearly gets there with 29.5 fps. But the other three games are in the high teens or low 20s. Even with FSR2 upscaling, which only three of the six games support, getting to 60 fps might be a stretch.<br><br>You could of course use a different suite of games for testing to make the results look better, or use lower settings (particularly in the DXR games) to close the gap between AMD and Nvidia GPUs. Or you could enable upscaling where supported, in which case DLSS remains more widely used than FSR2. But ultimately, the RX 7900 XT and RTX 4070 Ti do deliver relatively similar overall experiences, even though AMD&apos;s card has 20GB while Nvidia&apos;s GPU only has 12GB of VRAM.</p><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/XDf5PcNM.html" id="XDf5PcNM" title="How To Choose A Graphics Card" width="960" height="540" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe><ul><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html"><strong>Best Graphics Cards</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html"><strong>GPU Benchmarks and Hierarchy</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/graphics"><strong>All Graphics Content</strong></a></li></ul><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2560px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="tRnYdTfwFZPRdq9ssdTxsj" name="Sapphire-RX-7900-XT-Pulse-(3).jpg" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse photos and unboxing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tRnYdTfwFZPRdq9ssdTxsj.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="2560" height="1440" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tRnYdTfwFZPRdq9ssdTxsj.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Our power, clocks, and temperature testing now utilizes the same test suite as our gaming benchmarks, as the PCAT v2 hardware and FrameView software lets us collect this data alongside frametimes. We&apos;re also using our updated Core i9-13900K platform, so we&apos;re less likely to have CPU or platform limitations playing a role.<br><br>We have 1440p and 4K charts for power, GPU clocks, and temperatures below. Then we do a test using <em>Metro Exodus</em> at whatever "demanding for the GPU being tested" means — 1440p ultra in the case of the Sapphire RX 7900 XT — and after letting the game run for 15 minutes or more, we check noise levels. This basically represents the worst-case workload and maximum noise, though in practice a lot of games will end up at similar levels.<br><br>We&apos;ll present additional tables and information about efficiency (FPS/W) and value (FPS/$) at the bottom of the page.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CicNYDjxmVq8KYHqNgXSEo.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VFCVwz7t2q3q9ggfJA5XKo.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>The Sapphire RX 7900 XT does as advertised and uses slightly more power across our test suite than the reference 7900 XT, at both 1440p and 4K. In both cases, the Sapphire card averaged 322W of power use, while the reference card used 307W and 308W. Nvidia&apos;s RTX 4070 Ti meanwhile needed just 246W on average at 1440p, and 262W at 4K.<br><br>This is an ongoing issue with AMD&apos;s RDNA 3 architecture. If you look at RDNA 2 and Ampere, the previous generation GPUs, AMD generally held an advantage in efficiency. Part of that was because Nvidia used Samsung 8N (a 10nm-class node) while AMD used TSMC N7. Now, they&apos;re basically on the same 5nm-class node (TSMC 4N and N5, for Nvidia and AMD, respectively). It seems like Nvidia&apos;s architecture is overall simply more efficient.<br><br>There&apos;s also the question of how much extra power AMD had to use by opting for GPU chiplets instead of a monolithic die. We may never know for certain, but certainly there&apos;s room for improvement from AMD. Sapphire for its part managed to provide equivalent performance while drawing more power, which definitely isn&apos;t the best way of doing things.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4j65KAFxrhUp28G6qYyh3o.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZR6dVKUAhyzXkhocFe9h8o.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>GPU clock speeds on their own don&apos;t mean too much, unless you&apos;re comparing within the same architecture and even GPU. And that&apos;s where things get a bit interesting with the Sapphire RX 7900 XT. On paper, it has a higher 2450 MHz boost clock while the reference card &apos;only&apos; has a 2400 MHz boost clock. But we know from experience that AMD&apos;s latest generation GPUs are likely to exceed that conservative boost clock.<br><br>With the reference RX 7900 XT, across our 15-game suite, we measured average GPU clocks of 2573 MHz — 173 MHz above the advertised boost clock. The Sapphire model meanwhile only averaged 2488 MHz, 38 MHz above its advertised speed. That&apos;s a 1440p, incidentally. The clocks drop quite at bit at 4K, where the reference card still averaged 2494 MHz, but the Sapphire card dropped to just 2290 MHz.<br><br>Looking at these results, we can&apos;t help but wonder if our Sapphire card was a bit of a lemon. We&apos;ve since returned the card to the company, but other sites&apos; results don&apos;t seem to corroborate with our results. There&apos;s a good chance a different Pulse card would have performed better than what we&apos;ve shown here.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/igiNg6GzKGfBQsoMxCNdQo.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3qfeLc7doYtWvpz2Ep2GVo.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qFzWbfjDqEHxmq77aDjdU3.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8WTNozHX3oNMbiDVVC5EP3.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Finally, we have to look at temperatures and noise levels as a linked pair. Higher fan speeds can drop noise levels, and conversely lower fan speeds can result in higher temperatures but less noise. There&apos;s a balancing act that needs to be maintained, and generally speaking GPU core temperatures of less than 80C aren&apos;t a concern.<br><br>Looking just at the thermals, the Sapphire RX 7900 XT ran about 3–5C hotter than the reference card. Neither one averaged more than 70C, so temperatures aren&apos;t a concern, but we can only get a better idea of how the cards compare by also looking at fan speeds and/or noise levels.<br><br>We check noise levels using an SPL (sound pressure level) meter placed 10cm from the card, with the mic aimed right at the center of the middle fan (on the Sapphire card). This helps minimize the impact of other noise sources like the fans on the CPU cooler. The noise floor of our test environment and equipment is less than 32 dB(A).<br><br>After running <em>Metro Exodus</em> for over 15 minutes, the Sapphire RX 7900 XT settled at a fan speed of 38% with a noise level of 40.0 dB(A). While not the quietest GPU we&apos;ve tested — some of the really large cards run at 37–38 dB(A) — it&apos;s equal to or better than most other competing GPUs. The reference AMD 7900 XT on the other hand had a 48.7 dB(A) result, with the fans running at 63%.<br><br>There&apos;s no question in my mind that the Sapphire cooling solution ends up performing better overall, even if the actual temperatures are slightly higher. The reference cards get relatively loud, while Sapphire&apos;s fans and cooler generally do a better job while keeping noise levels in check.<br><br>We also tested with a static fan speed of 75%, which caused the Sapphire RX 7900 XT to generate 56.2 dB(A) of noise. That&apos;s similar to a lot of other GPUs, but not hugely important as you shouldn&apos;t normally see the fans spinning at more than 50% or so.</p><h2 id="gpu-value-and-efficiency">GPU Value and Efficiency</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/t25wuqahMJJZUF5XCgaBs4.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MftHrrrpx3rqfgtXfNMuf5.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2n7974ScQo6XRZjwUMcox5.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WWdPUquVg6zjja98wUFHa5.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dpdVGgoAi2h3v6jwjjWem5.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9CfD6yXMsGmB9sjGgUkNs5.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rqETpigiLCT9LQTTV9V2S5.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7x5X9i2Wsg4sRqnP34oSE5.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YU9yzZp9fMLrcmr5DuLT85.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6DgeX5CDqkWLFH3sopQMy4.png" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse benchmarking charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><div ><table><caption>Graphics Card Value and Efficiency</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " >Graphics Card</th><th  >FPS/$</th><th  >FPS/W</th><th  >1080p FPS</th><th  >1440p FPS</th><th  >4K FPS</th><th  >Online Price</th><th  >Power</th><th  >PC FPS/$</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4060+Ti&rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3J284822" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 4060 Ti</a></strong></td><td  >0.137</td><td  >0.382</td><td  >80.1</td><td  >54.9</td><td  >27.9</td><td  >$400</td><td  >144W</td><td  >10 — 0.0372</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6800+XT&rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3J284822" target="_blank">Radeon RX 6800 XT</a></strong></td><td  >0.131</td><td  >0.222</td><td  >90.1</td><td  >65.4</td><td  >35.1</td><td  >$500</td><td  >294W</td><td  >8 — 0.0415</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4070&rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3J284822" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 4070</a></strong></td><td  >0.125</td><td  >0.386</td><td  >101.8</td><td  >73.2</td><td  >39.3</td><td  >$585</td><td  >190W</td><td  >6 — 0.0441</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6950+XT&rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3J284822" target="_blank">Radeon RX 6950 XT</a></strong></td><td  >0.118</td><td  >0.230</td><td  >100.4</td><td  >74.5</td><td  >40.2</td><td  >$630</td><td  >324W</td><td  >7 — 0.0437</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6800&rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3J284822" target="_blank">Radeon RX 6800</a></strong></td><td  >0.115</td><td  >0.247</td><td  >78.6</td><td  >56.3</td><td  >30.1</td><td  >$490</td><td  >228W</td><td  >11 — 0.0360</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Ti&rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3J284822" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 4070 Ti</a></strong></td><td  >0.115</td><td  >0.367</td><td  >121.7</td><td  >90.5</td><td  >50.0</td><td  >$790</td><td  >246W</td><td  >2 — 0.0486</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7900+XT+Sapphire&rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3J284822" target="_blank">Radeon RX 7900 XT Sapphire</a></strong></td><td  >0.111</td><td  >0.267</td><td  >—</td><td  >86.2</td><td  >48.3</td><td  >$780</td><td  >322W</td><td  >4 — 0.0465</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7900+XT&rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3J284822" target="_blank">Radeon RX 7900 XT</a></strong></td><td  >0.111</td><td  >0.281</td><td  >113.2</td><td  >86.2</td><td  >47.8</td><td  >$780</td><td  >307W</td><td  >5 — 0.0465</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7900+XTX&rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3J284822" target="_blank">Radeon RX 7900 XTX</a></strong></td><td  >0.099</td><td  >0.278</td><td  >123.5</td><td  >96.6</td><td  >56.3</td><td  >$980</td><td  >347W</td><td  >3 — 0.0470</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4080&rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3J284822" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 4080</a></strong></td><td  >0.098</td><td  >0.412</td><td  >139.0</td><td  >108.3</td><td  >62.7</td><td  >$1,108</td><td  >263W</td><td  >1 — 0.0496</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6900+XT&rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3J284822" target="_blank">Radeon RX 6900 XT</a></strong></td><td  >0.090</td><td  >0.234</td><td  >95.4</td><td  >70.2</td><td  >37.9</td><td  >$780</td><td  >300W</td><td  >9 — 0.0379</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>This final gallery of images shows the full performance test suite, along with the above power, clocks, and temperature information. Latency is also provided, at least in some of the games (depending on the GPU and drivers used).<br><br>We&apos;ve calculated efficiency in FPS/W for the various games, plus value in FPS/$ using the best current online prices we could find (usually at Newegg or Amazon, though B&H and Best Buy were also checked). We&apos;ve summarized those results in the above table (based on 1440p performance and power), sorted by overall value.<br><br>As expected, even though cards like the RTX 4060 Ti have a (perhaps deservedly) bad rap, their lower prices still make them a "better value" than the more expensive GPUs. It&apos;s the typical diminishing returns in practice. However, we should note that we&apos;re only factoring in the cost of the graphics card. If you were to include a decent high-end PC, that changes the equation a lot. That&apos;s what the "PC FPS/$" column at the far right.<br><br>For the system cost, we used a <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BCDL7F5W">Core i7-13700K</a>, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07WSDLRVP">Arctic Freezer II 240</a> cooler, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BJDZRGRW">ASRock Z790 PG Lightning</a> motherboard, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BNYWFC91">32GB G.Skill DDR5-6400 CL32</a> memory, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BJGGL1SQ">Solidigm P44 Pro 2TB SSD</a>, <a href="https://www.newegg.com/white-phanteks-eclipse-p400a-atx-mid-tower/p/N82E16811854087">Phanteks Eclipse P400A case</a>, and <a href="https://www.newegg.com/phanteks-revolt-pro-ph-p850gc-850w/p/N82E16817987006">Phanteks Revolt Pro 850W gold PSU</a>. Combined, those cost $1,074 at the time of writing. For a complete PC, the "best value" (in quotes because there&apos;s an element of subjectivity involved) switches to the most expensive RTX 4080 first, then the RTX 4070 Ti, followed by the RX 7900 XTX and RX 7900 XT. Food for thought if you&apos;re planning a complete system update!<br><br>Efficiency also puts the RTX 4080 in first, followed by the RTX 4070, RTX 4060 Ti, RTX 4070 Ti, and then finally the RX 7900 XT (reference card). Sapphire&apos;s GPU ranks two steps lower, just behind the RX 7900 XTX, thanks to its higher power draw. There&apos;s still a decent gap in efficiency between it and the RX 6800, however, which was the highest efficiency GPU from AMD&apos;s RX 6000-series.</p><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/XDf5PcNM.html" id="XDf5PcNM" title="How To Choose A Graphics Card" width="960" height="540" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe><ul><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html"><strong>Best Graphics Cards</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html"><strong>GPU Benchmarks and Hierarchy</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/graphics"><strong>All Graphics Content</strong></a></li></ul><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2560px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="P7cR7ndxwsEhWYZydjuJRk" name="Sapphire-RX-7900-XT-Pulse-(6).jpg" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse photos and unboxing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/P7cR7ndxwsEhWYZydjuJRk.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="2560" height="1440" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/P7cR7ndxwsEhWYZydjuJRk.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>The Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse is a bit of a curiosity, as far as our test results go. On paper, it should be faster than the reference 7900 XT. Other sites show it as being a few percent faster. Our particular sample, though? Not quite so great, with higher power draw and at best equivalent performance. We suspect most Pulse cards will fare slightly better, as it&apos;s a bit surprising that the card didn&apos;t clearly beat the reference design in performance.<br><br>It also used about 5% more power on average while delivering equivalent performance, and temperatures were a few degrees Celsius higher under load. But the good news is that the fans and cooling are clearly superior, with noise levels peaking at 40 dB(A) compared to the reference card that gets noticeably louder at 49 dB(A).<br><br>If you&apos;re looking for an inexpensive RX 7900 XT and you don&apos;t care about RGB lighting or flashy designs, the Sapphire Pulse is a great option. If you prefer something with more bling, the <a href="https://www.newegg.com/asrock-radeon-rx-7900-xt-rx7900xt-pg-20go/p/N82E16814930083">ASRock Phantom Gaming OC</a> has some RGB to brighten your day, for the same $779 asking price. And that&apos;s probably the best news overall: RX 7900 XT cards can now be had for $120 less than the original (too high) launch MSRP.<br><br>That price change was pretty much required, as performance in general ends up being roughly equivalent to the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-review-a-costly-70-class-gpu">RTX 4070 Ti</a>. Rasterized performance at native rendering is faster, but ray tracing is slower, and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-review-a-costly-70-class-gpu/4">DLSS</a> still provides better quality upscaling, in more games, than <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-fsr2-deathloop-vs-dlss">FSR 2</a>.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2560px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="g34JYBB6nq8z3KnDaJd4Jk" name="Sapphire-RX-7900-XT-Pulse-(5).jpg" alt="Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse photos and unboxing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/g34JYBB6nq8z3KnDaJd4Jk.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="2560" height="1440" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>AMD does provide you with a lot more VRAM, 20GB versus Nvidia&apos;s competing card with just 12GB. If you&apos;re worried about games starting to push into requiring 16GB or more VRAM, it&apos;s potentially a safer bet. Or you can just recognize that HD texture packs often do very little for image fidelity and stick with settings that won&apos;t exceed 12GB (unless a game is poorly coded, which unfortunately seems to be the case with a lot of recent ports).<br><br>Which of these high-end cards ends up being the better pick will ultimately come down to the games you want to play, and what settings you want to use. If you want all the bells and whistles turned on, you might think that the 20GB VRAM trumps 12GB, and it does in some cases. But then you also have to consider that ray tracing will almost always favor Nvidia&apos;s RTX 4070 Ti, sometimes by a lot, even if it doesn&apos;t have as much VRAM.<br><br>We&apos;re also still waiting for AMD&apos;s lower cost <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/when-will-amd-launch-rx-7700-7800">RX 7800 XT and RX 7700 XT GPUs</a> to launch. That will likely happen in the next month or two, though we&apos;re not sure on pricing just yet. We&apos;re also not sure where performance will land, and it could end up that a $600 RX 7800 XT will only roughly match the existing $600-ish RX 6950 XT.<br><br>This generation of GPUs increasingly feels like a step sideways from AMD, moving to GPU chiplets and prepping for future generation architectures while cutting costs, rather than a significant step forward in performance. Yes, the top RX 7900 XTX and 7900 XT are faster than the previous generation, but we could see diminishing gains further down the RX 7000-series product stack.<br><br>For top-shelf performance from AMD, the <a href="https://www.newegg.com/asrock-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-rx7900xtx-pg-24go/p/N82E16814930081">RX 7900 XTX</a> can still beat the <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BNLSDRKB">RX 7900 XT</a> by 18% at 4K ultra. That&apos;s a pretty big jump, accompanied by a 21% increase in price (for the least expensive cards right now). The <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BR6L7TKR">Sapphire RX 7900 XT Pulse</a> meanwhile also beats the previous generation <a href="https://www.newegg.com/asrock-radeon-rx-6950-xt-rx6950xt-pg-16go/p/N82E16814930088">RX 6950 XT</a> by 20% at 4K, for a 31% increase in price (using current online prices). Prices <em>are</em> fluctuating quite a lot right now, likely due to the impending Navi 32 launch, so keep that in mind.<br><br>The Sapphire RX 7900 XT ultimately ends up as a fine option for those shopping in the upper range of AMD GPUs. It&apos;s not exceptional, but it&apos;s better than some of the other alternatives, depending on your perspective. If you&apos;re planning to sit this generation out, it will probably be another 16–18 months before we start seeing the next generation GPUs that might have something more to say about performance, hopefully at better prices (though we wouldn&apos;t count on that).</p><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/XDf5PcNM.html" id="XDf5PcNM" title="How To Choose A Graphics Card" width="960" height="540" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe><ul><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html"><strong>Best Graphics Cards</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html"><strong>GPU Benchmarks and Hierarchy</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/graphics"><strong>All Graphics Content</strong></a></li></ul>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Apple M2 Ultra GPU Outpaces RTX 4070 Ti in Early Compute Benchmarks ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/apple-m2-ultra-graphics-outpaces-rtx-4070-ti-in-early-compute-benchmarks</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ In early compute benchmarks, Apple's M2 Ultra chip appears to perform somewhere between an RTX 4070 Ti and RTX 4080 in Geekbench 6 and GFXBench testing. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">b7zSX8jzPbTPhtdNY6PzhU</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MKJuZrMGZZw8cko2kg2zML-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sat, 10 Jun 2023 16:23:15 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:54:15 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Mark Tyson ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/56vqMYLDaKRHPhHZgbADFR.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Mark&#039;s enthusiasm for computers dampened at an early age by the rubber-keyed Sinclair Spectrum 48K and feelings of Commodore 64 envy. However, in the mid-80s, hope in a digital future was rekindled by the purchase of an Atari 520 STe. Since that time Mark has used a multitude of computers for fun and professional endeavors. He often owned both Macs and PCs but went cold on the former after OS9 was killed off, and warmed to the latter with the introduction of Windows XP.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Early work years were spent in artwork and reprographics but in the late noughties, Mark started to blog about computers, Taiwanese food culture, and guitar design. This activity led to a full-time position writing about breaking PC tech news for HEXUS, for the best part of a decade. When HEXUS was abruptly closed, Mark helped with the foundation of Club386, before finding a new home at Tom&#039;s Hardware.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
When not wearing through the keycap legends on his PC keyboards, Mark can be found wandering the computer malls of Taiwan&#039;s neon-lit conurbations and enjoying local and international cuisine.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MKJuZrMGZZw8cko2kg2zML-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Tom&#039;s Hardware]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Apple M2 Ultra Mac Pro]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Apple M2 Ultra Mac Pro]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Apple M2 Ultra Mac Pro]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MKJuZrMGZZw8cko2kg2zML-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Benchmarks of the Apple M2 Ultra&apos;s GPU appear to have leaked online. Today, we spotted various social media posts sharing <a href="https://twitter.com/jimmyjamesuk123/status/1667339073936142337">Geekbench GPU compute scores</a> and <a href="https://twitter.com/VadimYuryev/status/1667265434016681985">GFXBench Aztec Ruins scores</a>. On the surface, these results seem to show that the GPU in the new M2 Ultra is highly formidable, offering GPU compute performance somewhere between a GeForce RTX 4070 Ti and RTX 4080. But we need to step back a bit and explain precisely what it is we&apos;re looking at.<br><br>We reported upon <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/m2-ultra-mac-studio-specs-price-release-date">the new Apple M2 Ultra</a> SoC reveal during the firm&apos;s annual WWDC earlier in the week. The chip will arrive in updated Mac Studio and Mac Pro designs, which are scheduled to ship next week. However, someone appears to be testing these new Mac computers/processors before consumers can get hold of them, as a raft of benchmarks has appeared online recently.<br><br>Yesterday, we picked through a selection of Apple M2 Ultra benchmarks, focusing on the SoC&apos;s <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/apple-m2-ultra-geekbenched">CPU core performance</a>. Today, we will look more closely at the potential compute capabilities of the M2 Ultra&apos;s GPU, thanks to the Geekbench and GFXbench leaks mentioned in the intro.</p><h2 id="m2-ultra-geekbench-6-compute-benchmarks">M2 Ultra Geekbench 6 Compute Benchmarks</h2><p>It looks like several pre-release M2 Ultra Apple Mac system users have run Geekbench 6&apos;s <a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/search?k=v6_compute&q=M2+Ultra">Metal and OpenCL GPU benchmarks</a>. Apple&apos;s Metal API is a proprietary graphics API developed by the firm for fast &apos;direct to the metal&apos; hardware addressing, like an Apple optimized parallel to Microsoft&apos;s DirectX.<br><br>While these are very interesting synthetic compute benchmarks, we look forward to some thorough real-world testing of <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/mac-pro-finally-here-gets-m2-ultra">the new Apple Macs</a> with M2 Ultra processors, shortly, particularly in gaming, which has been a pain point for Apple&apos;s chips.<br><br>Note that GPU compute tends to scale far better with multi-chip approaches than GPU graphics — think about Ethereum mining back in the day, where you could connect eight (or more) GPUs to a single modest CPU via PCIe x1 connections and they would all mine at basically 100% of their maximum performance. Not all compute workloads scale <em>that</em> well, but it&apos;s still very different than the scaling traditionally seen with real-time graphics used in games.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:983px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:61.85%;"><img id="6jvHcnfaUUQYy7sMbHhBs6" name="GB6-M2-ultra-compute-metal.jpg" alt="Apple M2 Ultra Graphics Outpaces RTX 4070 Ti" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6jvHcnfaUUQYy7sMbHhBs6.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="983" height="608" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6jvHcnfaUUQYy7sMbHhBs6.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Geekbench)</span></figcaption></figure><p>The new M2 Ultra chip&apos;s GPU, featuring up to 76 integrated graphics cores, looks impressive compared to the previous gen M1 Ultra with its maximum 64 graphics cores. In a direct comparison using Geekbench 6, the new-gen M2 Ultra scores about 220,000 or thereabouts, compared to about 155,000 on average for the M1 Ultra.<br><br>By this metric, M2 Ultra is over 40% faster than its predecessor in GPU compute tasks. It only has around 10% more graphics cores, so Apple has done well to achieve this scale of uplift.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/p4gzCYuJpw5sRekvsvBJf6.jpg" alt="Apple M2 Ultra Graphics Outpaces RTX 4070 Ti" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Geekbench</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zTdU27s5h5ASdBYHw2LpX6.jpg" alt="Apple M2 Ultra Graphics Outpaces RTX 4070 Ti" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Geekbench</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Turning to a different comparison, the new Apple M2 Ultra&apos;s 220,000 Geekbench 6 Compute scores (Metal) sit between the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti (208,340 OpenCL) and RTX 4080 (245,706 OpenCL). For a direct Geekbench 6 OpenCL comparison, the Apple M2 Ultra Open CL scores of about 155,000 are much closer to PC GPUs like the Nvidia RTX A5000 and AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT.<br><br>Again, we need to note that Geekbench 6 OpenCL compute performance does not usually translate well to actual gaming workloads. Synthetic Geekbench 6 performance is very different from real-world graphics.</p><h2 id="m2-ultra-gfxbench-benchmarks">M2 Ultra GFXBench Benchmarks</h2><p>Another user has put their M2 Ultra-powered Apple Mac through the GFXBench test suite. In the 4K Aztec Ruins offscreen tests, the new Apple SoC is <a href="https://gfxbench.com/device.jsp?benchmark=gfx50&os=OS%20X&api=metal&cpu-arch=ARM&hwtype=GPU&hwname=Apple%20M2%20Ultra&did=115502975&D=Apple%20M2%20Ultra">over 55% faster</a> than its predecessor. This seems to be an even better result than the Geekbench 6 GPU compute comparison. Theoretically, it should also give a better indication of 3D accelerations / gaming performance uplifts, since this is a graphics workload rather than compute.<br><br>However, GFXBench is not an ideal desktop GPU comparison tool as it doesn&apos;t usually scale well with the highest-end graphics hardware. The Aztec Ruins benchmark is more appropriate to smartphone SoCs than to GPUs like RTX 4070 Ti. Furthermore, we need to focus on the GFXBench "offscreen" tests, which assesses the rendering power of the GPU without worrying about the display resolution in use. Considering the entire benchmark suite weighs in at less than 1GB, it&apos;s a safe bet that it&apos;s not very representative of modern games that can total more than 100GB.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:788px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:97.59%;"><img id="UJrWU6L84ouVHvrPvRWsm6" name="GFXbench-comparison.jpg" alt="Apple M2 Ultra Graphics Outpaces RTX 4070 Ti" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UJrWU6L84ouVHvrPvRWsm6.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="788" height="769" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UJrWU6L84ouVHvrPvRWsm6.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Geekbench)</span></figcaption></figure><p>The screenshot above shows that the Apple M2 Ultra can achieve nearly 315 FPS in the 4K Aztec Ruins high-tier offscreen test (Metal API). Above, we mentioned that this score is over 55% faster than the M1 Ultra. A comparable score on the PC platform would again be something between the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti and <a href="https://gfxbench.com/device.jsp?benchmark=gfx50&did=110613276&os=Windows&api=dx12&hwtype=dGPU&hwname=NVIDIA+GeForce+RTX+4080">RTX 4080</a> (DX12 API).<br><br>Big spoonfuls of salt are required here. Ideally, we need to see performance in games and other graphics and compute applications rather than these synthetic workloads that may not be representative of anything truly useful. We look forward to seeing some thorough real-world testing of <a target="_blank" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/mac-pro-finally-here-gets-m2-ultra">the new Apple Macs</a> with M2 Ultra processors, which should be available next week.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Nvidia Is Giving Away a GeForce RTX 4080 With a Diablo IV Backplate ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/giving-away-rtx-4080-diablo-4-backplate</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Nvidia has announced another giveaway of one of its RTX 40-series GPUs, this time surrounding two RTX 4080 Founders Edition cards featuring a custom Diablo IV GPU backplate. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">z8XxtYKVMLRxDpo2cZB5ah</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vARQc2FAotwkLctFJVF6gJ-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jun 2023 15:26:30 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:56:22 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Aaron Klotz) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Aaron Klotz ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aAk2saHqkgFuTCanz8LnmD.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Aaron began building computers back when he was 8 years old in the mid-2000s, and it’s been a hobby of his ever since then. With a focus on computer hardware, he became an avid member of the Tom’s Hardware forums several years later, helping people solve issues with their PCs. He is now a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware, writing about computer hardware news and more. When not busy playing or writing about computer hardware, he spends his free time playing video games like Star Citizen or Apex Legends.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vARQc2FAotwkLctFJVF6gJ-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Nvidia]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Nvidia GeForce RTX 4080 Founders Edition - With Custom Diablo IV Backplate]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Nvidia GeForce RTX 4080 Founders Edition - With Custom Diablo IV Backplate]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Nvidia GeForce RTX 4080 Founders Edition - With Custom Diablo IV Backplate]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vARQc2FAotwkLctFJVF6gJ-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Nvidia is giving gamers another chance to win one of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">best graphics cards</a> in the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/nvidia-ada-lovelace-and-geforce-rtx-40-series-everything-we-know">Ada Lovelace RTX 40-series</a> lineup. This time, the green team is <a href="https://tinyurl.com/nvidia-diablo4" target="_blank">giving away</a> two GeForce RTX 4080 Founders Edition graphics cards featuring a custom <em>Diablo IV</em> GPU backplate to commemorate the game&apos;s release. You can see how the game runs on a bunch of GPUs in our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/diablo-iv-pc-settings-benchmarks-performance-system-requirements"><em>Diablo IV</em> PC benchmarks</a>.<br><br>To enter, you must follow at <a href="https://tinyurl.com/nv-diablo4-rules" target="_blank">least one</a> of Nvidia&apos;s social media channels, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, or Tiktok, and follow any instructions Nvidia gives out. To physically enter, you need to like, comment, tag, and share any of Nvidia&apos;s social media posts it publishes according to Nvidia&apos;s prompts.<br><br>Both GPUs will feature a customized <em>Diablo IV</em> backplate that sits on top of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-review">RTX 4080 Founders Edition&apos;s</a> stock backplate/cover. The backplate shows off a large <em>Diablo IV</em> logo to the left with a graphic to the right.<br><br><em>Diablo IV</em> is the latest installment in the Diablo series, released today, June 6th, for all gamers. The game comes with Nvidia&apos;s full suite of gaming features, including Nvidia&apos;s latency-enhancing Reflex technology, DLSS 2 upscaling, and DLSS 3 frame generation. (Ray tracing is planned for a future update.) The game will easily run on all RTX 30- and RTX 40-series GPU, and a lot of older GPUs as well.</p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/diablo-iv-pc-settings-benchmarks-performance-system-requirements"><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.05%;"><img id="xDNvzqx9iDYwknECXtqWDZ" name="ALLGPU-Diablo4-02-1080p-Ultra.png" alt="Diablo IV GPU Performance" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xDNvzqx9iDYwknECXtqWDZ.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1441" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure></a><p>For perspective, Nvidia also provided some benchmarks. Its lowest-end RTX 40-series mobile GPU, the RTX 4050, can run <em>Diablo IV</em> at 1080p maximum settings at nearly 70FPS without frame generation. As a result, basically any modern GPU can run this game, especially if you don&apos;t feel the need to run at maxed out settings.<br><br>Again, for more details, check out our full <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/diablo-iv-pc-settings-benchmarks-performance-system-requirements"><em>Diablo IV</em> GPU performance analysis</a>, featuring 36 Nvidia, Intel, and AMD cards. The main takeaway is that you&apos;ll need at least 3GB of VRAM to run the medium preset well, 4GB for the high preset, and 6GB for the ultra preset. Of course, all of that will change once ray tracing arrives, but right now there&apos;s plenty of spare frames to go around.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Nvidia’s RTX 3070 Drops to New Low of $399: Real Deals ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidias-rtx-3070-drops-to-new-low-of-dollar399-real-deals</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Whether it's to add value to the new range of GPUs on the way or shift stock, we like to see the price of graphics cards continue to fall. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">CgnBvY2ThTEfRnc2UnuShV</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/E2FtXiy794qQbFAZVrLFST-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 18 May 2023 14:48:55 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:56:25 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Stewart Bendle ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/w3kayUSywmEpu3tyDE6M8W.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Stewart has loved PCs since he was a child dabbling with BASIC on a ZX Spectrum 48K and still gets far too excited about building and playing on PCs now. He loves to tune and overclock his computers to smooth and stable clocks and run his favorite games and applications on the best settings without compromising quality and framerates. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;A firm believer in “Bang for the buck,” Stewart likes to research the best prices and locate the best coupon codes for computers, components and peripherals. Stewart also needs a spare room to house all his old PC parts and peripherals and maybe needs an intervention to stop him from buying more headphones, mice, and keyboards.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/E2FtXiy794qQbFAZVrLFST-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Future]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Real Deals]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Real Deals]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Real Deals]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/E2FtXiy794qQbFAZVrLFST-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>There are new 4000-series GPUs arriving on the market soon, and whether it&apos;s to make them seem more attractive or shift some old stock the price of this Nvidia RTX 3070 has dropped to a more wallet-friendly level, although I would love to see them cheaper still. </p><p>Amazon has the <a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B09CBYXJD9" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Asus Dual Nvidia RTX 3070 V2 OC 8GB on sale for $399</a> — that&apos;s the cheapest we&apos;ve seen this particular graphics card. The RTX 3070 is a great mid-range card with solid performance (see our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/asus-rtx-3070-tuf-gaming-oc-review">review of the RTX 3070</a>) but it is limited by its 8GBs of VRAM, which does seem to be becoming more and more of an issue with some of the latest games not being optimized enough to not max-out the VRAM capacity of some GPUs.</p><p>Increase your pixel density with this 4K gaming monitor from Acer. The <a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B09HN33HRD" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Acer Predator XB283K is a 28-inch UHD monitor that&apos;s now down to $499</a> on Amazon, making it a far more financially accessible 4K monitor for gamers looking to adopt a higher resolution screen. Just make sure you have a powerful enough graphics card to be able to make the most of it. The Acer Predator XB283K features an IPS panel that has a 1ms response time and a fast refresh rate of 144Hz.</p><p>If you&apos;ve been looking at getting a new gaming laptop that features the latest and greatest CPUs and GPUs then this might be a deal for you. <a href="https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/p/laptops/legion-laptops/legion-pro-series/legion-pro-5i-gen-8-(16-inch-intel)/82wk000cus" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Lenovo&apos;s Legion 5i Gen 8 is available for $1,515</a> thanks to a sales discount and extra eCoupon code (<strong>EXTRA5</strong>) that nets a further $79 off of the original price. This model of the Lenovo Legion 5i Gen 8 features an Intel Core i7-13700HX and Nvidia <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-review">RTX 4070</a> GPU. We also <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/lenovo-legion-pro-5i-gen-8" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">reviewed the Lenovo Legion 5i Gen 8</a> so take a look at our benchmarks and thoughts about this gaming laptop.</p><p>See below for more of today&apos;s great Real Deals. </p><h2 id="tl-dr-x2014-today-x2019-s-best-deals">TL;DR — Today’s Best Deals</h2><ul><li><strong>Asus Dual Nvidia RTX 3070 V2 OC 8GB GPU: </strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B09CBYXJD9" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><strong>now $399 at Amazon</strong></a><strong> (was $579)</strong></li><li><strong>Acer Predator XB283K 4K Gaming Monitor: </strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B09HN33HRD" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><strong>now $499 at Amazon</strong></a><strong> (was $599)</strong></li><li><strong>Lenovo Legion 5i Gen 8 Gaming Laptop: </strong><a href="https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/p/laptops/legion-laptops/legion-pro-series/legion-pro-5i-gen-8-(16-inch-intel)/82wk000cus" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><strong>now $1,515 at Lenovo</strong></a><strong> (was $1,879)</strong></li><li><strong>Logitech G560 PC Gaming Speakers: </strong><a href="https://www.newegg.com/black-logitech-g560-wired-with-bluetooth-wireless/p/N82E16836121244" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><strong>now $189 at Newegg</strong></a><strong> (was $199)</strong></li><li><strong>Lian Li Lancool 216 X Black Steel PC Case: </strong><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/2AM-000Z-000A7" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><strong>now $89 at Newegg</strong></a><strong> (was $102)</strong></li></ul><h2 id="today-x2019-s-best-deals-in-detail">Today’s best deals in detail</h2><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="5e8946ce-82c0-43a1-bbf8-6f62b3707b3d" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Asus Dual Nvidia RTX 3070 V2 OC 8GB: now $399 at Amazon" data-dimension48="Asus Dual Nvidia RTX 3070 V2 OC 8GB: now $399 at Amazon" href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B09CBYXJD9" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:629px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:62.96%;"><img id="htB3fFrGLggFfCGBUCqQ3e" name="Asus_Dual_Nvidia_GeForce_RTX_3070_V2_OC_8GB-removebg-preview.png" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/htB3fFrGLggFfCGBUCqQ3e.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="629" height="396" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p><strong>Asus Dual Nvidia RTX 3070 V2 OC 8GB: </strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B09CBYXJD9" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="5e8946ce-82c0-43a1-bbf8-6f62b3707b3d" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Asus Dual Nvidia RTX 3070 V2 OC 8GB: now $399 at Amazon" data-dimension48="Asus Dual Nvidia RTX 3070 V2 OC 8GB: now $399 at Amazon"><strong>now $399 at Amazon</strong></a> (was $579)<br>This GPU can produce great framerates in the latest games with the 2nd generation of RT cores for Ray Tracing in your favorite games and a speedy 1800MHz boost clock in OC mode. Outputs include 2x HDMI 2.1 ports and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a ports for plenty of connectivity.<br><br>See our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">GPU hierarchy</a> for more details. <a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B09CBYXJD9" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="5e8946ce-82c0-43a1-bbf8-6f62b3707b3d" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Asus Dual Nvidia RTX 3070 V2 OC 8GB: now $399 at Amazon" data-dimension48="Asus Dual Nvidia RTX 3070 V2 OC 8GB: now $399 at Amazon">View Deal</a></p></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="5746afd3-c37b-4c58-b7bb-7f6d89288c3c" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Acer Predator XB283K 28-Inch 4K Gaming Monitor: now $499 at Amazon" data-dimension48="Acer Predator XB283K 28-Inch 4K Gaming Monitor: now $499 at Amazon" href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B09HN33HRD" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1321px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:78.96%;"><img id="auvpsvqfjsq8cXPk6fYBFE" name="Acer Predator XB283K.png" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/auvpsvqfjsq8cXPk6fYBFE.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1321" height="1043" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p><strong>Acer Predator XB283K 28-Inch 4K Gaming Monitor: </strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B09HN33HRD" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="5746afd3-c37b-4c58-b7bb-7f6d89288c3c" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Acer Predator XB283K 28-Inch 4K Gaming Monitor: now $499 at Amazon" data-dimension48="Acer Predator XB283K 28-Inch 4K Gaming Monitor: now $499 at Amazon"><strong>now $499 at Amazon</strong></a> (was $599)<br>At 28 inches the Acer Predator XB283K would produce extremely crisp images with its 4K resolution and 90% DCI-P3 color gamut. This monitor features an IPS panel with a refresh rate of 144Hz.<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B09HN33HRD" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="5746afd3-c37b-4c58-b7bb-7f6d89288c3c" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Acer Predator XB283K 28-Inch 4K Gaming Monitor: now $499 at Amazon" data-dimension48="Acer Predator XB283K 28-Inch 4K Gaming Monitor: now $499 at Amazon">View Deal</a></p></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="90e61901-afdd-4c9c-8fb6-2e58542edc2c" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Lenovo Legion 5i Gen 8: now $1,515 at Lenovo" data-dimension48="Lenovo Legion 5i Gen 8: now $1,515 at Lenovo" href="https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/p/laptops/legion-laptops/legion-pro-series/legion-pro-5i-gen-8-(16-inch-intel)/82wk000cus" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:486px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:70.78%;"><img id="w88PNPLQaLr7GurmGUpk5" name="Lenovo Legion 5i Gen 8 .png" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/w88PNPLQaLr7GurmGUpk5.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="486" height="344" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p><strong>Lenovo Legion 5i Gen 8: </strong><a href="https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/p/laptops/legion-laptops/legion-pro-series/legion-pro-5i-gen-8-(16-inch-intel)/82wk000cus" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="90e61901-afdd-4c9c-8fb6-2e58542edc2c" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Lenovo Legion 5i Gen 8: now $1,515 at Lenovo" data-dimension48="Lenovo Legion 5i Gen 8: now $1,515 at Lenovo"><strong>now $1,515 at Lenovo</strong></a> (was $1,879)<br>The Lenovo Legion 5i Gen 8 comes with a 16-inch screen that is powered by an Nvidia RTX 4070 mobile GPU and an Intel Core i7-13700HX CPU, 16GB of DDR5 RAM, and a 512GB SSD for storage. Use code <strong>EXTRA5 </strong>for an additional $79 discount. <a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/p/laptops/legion-laptops/legion-pro-series/legion-pro-5i-gen-8-(16-inch-intel)/82wk000cus" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="90e61901-afdd-4c9c-8fb6-2e58542edc2c" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Lenovo Legion 5i Gen 8: now $1,515 at Lenovo" data-dimension48="Lenovo Legion 5i Gen 8: now $1,515 at Lenovo">View Deal</a></p></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="4afac01e-d9fe-46c4-986e-16f0075a3fe8" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Logitech G560 PC Gaming Speakers: now $189 at Newegg" data-dimension48="Logitech G560 PC Gaming Speakers: now $189 at Newegg" href="https://www.newegg.com/black-logitech-g560-wired-with-bluetooth-wireless/p/N82E16836121244" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1409px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:66.86%;"><img id="bmwjXWEu5Ldvk9SGMLDowD" name="Logitech G560 PC Gaming Speakers.png" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bmwjXWEu5Ldvk9SGMLDowD.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1409" height="942" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p><strong>Logitech G560 PC Gaming Speakers: </strong><a href="https://www.newegg.com/black-logitech-g560-wired-with-bluetooth-wireless/p/N82E16836121244" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="4afac01e-d9fe-46c4-986e-16f0075a3fe8" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Logitech G560 PC Gaming Speakers: now $189 at Newegg" data-dimension48="Logitech G560 PC Gaming Speakers: now $189 at Newegg"><strong>now $189 at Newegg</strong></a><strong> with promo code</strong> (was $199)<br>These colorful speakers from Logitech come with built-in RGB lights that can sync to your games and music using the integrated LIGHTSYNC software. The combined peak power of this unit is 240 Watts and the speakers also provide a virtual 7.1 DTS:X Ultra surround sound soundscape.<br>Use code <strong>AB23459 </strong>for a $10 discount.<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/black-logitech-g560-wired-with-bluetooth-wireless/p/N82E16836121244" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="4afac01e-d9fe-46c4-986e-16f0075a3fe8" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Logitech G560 PC Gaming Speakers: now $189 at Newegg" data-dimension48="Logitech G560 PC Gaming Speakers: now $189 at Newegg">View Deal</a></p></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="357c7342-b532-45c8-83bc-c2a6b67ee8ec" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Lian Li Lancool 216 X Black Steel ATX PC Case: now $89 at Newegg" data-dimension48="Lian Li Lancool 216 X Black Steel ATX PC Case: now $89 at Newegg" href="https://www.newegg.com/p/2AM-000Z-000A7" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:894px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:106.04%;"><img id="XjCVZHjuwhbEyzUaiThPE8" name="Lian Li Lancool 216 X Black Steel.png" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XjCVZHjuwhbEyzUaiThPE8.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="894" height="948" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p><strong>Lian Li Lancool 216 X Black Steel ATX PC Case: </strong><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/2AM-000Z-000A7" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="357c7342-b532-45c8-83bc-c2a6b67ee8ec" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Lian Li Lancool 216 X Black Steel ATX PC Case: now $89 at Newegg" data-dimension48="Lian Li Lancool 216 X Black Steel ATX PC Case: now $89 at Newegg"><strong>now $89 at Newegg</strong></a> (was $102)<br>The Lian Li Lancool 216 X Black Steel is an ATX-sized PC case that can fit motherboards of this size and smaller. With an airflow-oriented front and top mesh panel and a tempered-glass side panel, this case allows cool temps and a view of the internal hardware. This case has 2x160mm front fans and 1x140mm rear exhaust fan.<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/p/2AM-000Z-000A7" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="357c7342-b532-45c8-83bc-c2a6b67ee8ec" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Lian Li Lancool 216 X Black Steel ATX PC Case: now $89 at Newegg" data-dimension48="Lian Li Lancool 216 X Black Steel ATX PC Case: now $89 at Newegg">View Deal</a></p></div><h2 id="looking-for-more-deals">Looking for more deals?</h2>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ AMD's RX 7900 XTX Matches an RTX 4090, While Using 700W of Power ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-rx-7900-xtx-matches-rtx-4090-at-700w</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ AMD's RX 7900 XTX was recently modified to run without a power limit, allowing the GPU to achieve RTX 4090 performance in 3DMark while consuming 700W of power. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">nWpWhSUUEanXQBuEF6FYwV</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5gKvMqf9QKjcCLovpfxznn-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 16 May 2023 22:00:14 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 10:07:34 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Aaron Klotz) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Aaron Klotz ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aAk2saHqkgFuTCanz8LnmD.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Aaron began building computers back when he was 8 years old in the mid-2000s, and it’s been a hobby of his ever since then. With a focus on computer hardware, he became an avid member of the Tom’s Hardware forums several years later, helping people solve issues with their PCs. He is now a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware, writing about computer hardware news and more. When not busy playing or writing about computer hardware, he spends his free time playing video games like Star Citizen or Apex Legends.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5gKvMqf9QKjcCLovpfxznn-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Reddit - u/jedi95]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[RX 7900 XTX 700W Power Mod]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[RX 7900 XTX 700W Power Mod]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[RX 7900 XTX 700W Power Mod]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5gKvMqf9QKjcCLovpfxznn-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>A Reddit user by the name of Jedi95 modified one of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">Best GPUs</a>, the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top">RX 7900 XTX</a> to <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/13hygsi/the_true_limits_of_the_7900_xtx_unlimited_power/">run without a power limit</a> to see how fast the card would go. Thanks to a high-end custom water-cooling setup paired with 10 degrees Celsius coolant temperatures, the power-modded RX 7900 XTX was able to achieve RTX 4090 performance in 3DMark with a very impressive clock speed of 3.33GHz. The only drawback was that the card had to consume nearly 700W to hit this performance target.<br><br>The performance achieved by this modified 7900 XTX pushes the card into new territory. In 3DMark Time Spy Extreme, the GPU was able to hit 18,335 points, which exceeds the results of some <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-review">RTX 4090</a> cards. For instance, according to <a href="https://www.pcgamer.com/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-founders-edition-review-performance-benchmarks/">PCGamer&apos;s</a> RTX 4090 review, it recorded a GPU index score of 16,654 points, which is 10% slower than Jedi95&apos;s RX 7900 XTX benchmark result.<br><br>This suggests AMD&apos;s RX 7900 XTX can jump a performance tier and compete with Nvidia&apos;s flagship <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-review">RTX 4090</a> (rather than the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-review">RTX 4080</a>), at the cost of power consumption. And of course, 3DMark isn&apos;t necessarily representative of actual gaming performance.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2560px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="Ay9ZUzE2kQQEEb4fHSSM3" name="rx7900xtx-mod.jpg" alt="RX 7900 XTX 700W Power Mod" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ay9ZUzE2kQQEEb4fHSSM3.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="2560" height="1440" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Reddit - u/jedi95)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Power throttling is a very common occurrence on AMD&apos;s RX 7900-series cards, with most games being able to hit the maximum power rating on these GPUs. At that point, they&apos;ll begin to throttle, or at least not clock as high. This is somewhat different from Nvidia&apos;s RTX 40-series GPUs, which often run well below their maximum rated power consumption figures while gaming.<br><br>The modified RX 7900 XTX was also able to match the best 7900 XTX Time Spy Extreme benchmark results in the <a href="https://www.3dmark.com/search#advanced?test=spy%20X&cpuId=&gpuId=1526&gpuCount=0&gpuType=ALL&deviceType=ALL&storageModel=ALL&memoryChannels=0&country=&scoreType=overallScore&hofMode=false&showInvalidResults=false&freeParams=&minGpuCoreClock=&maxGpuCoreClock=&minGpuMemClock=&maxGpuMemClock=&minCpuClock=&maxCpuClock=">3DMark browser</a>, competing GPUs that were probably cooled with liquid nitrogen.</p><p>The mod Jedi95 used was a "shunt-like" mod that allows the VRM controller to report false power consumption figures to the GPU, thus bypassing AMD&apos;s power limitations. This allowed him to effectively run the 7900 XTX without any power limitations whatsoever, since the GPU doesn&apos;t know how much power it&apos;s actually consuming. According to Jedi95, the mod he used is better than a traditional shunt mod since the power reporting can be controlled with software.<br><br>None of this is particularly surprising, as most chips — CPUs, GPUs, and other SOCs — are designed for a particular spot on the voltage and frequency curve. Pushing more voltage through a chip while applying improved cooling can get things running stable, but power scales with frequency and the square of voltage. Adding more of both is a recipe for extreme power use, as shown here.<br><br>It&apos;s interesting on the one hand to see what AMD&apos;s <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-radeon-rx-7000-rdna-3-price-performance-benchmarks-release-date">RDNA 3 GPUs</a> can do when power limits are tossed out the window. Running unconstrained, Navi 31 can hit blisteringly high clock speeds of well over 3.3 GHz, yielding significantly higher performance. Based on Jedi95&apos;s results, AMD potentially has more than enough headroom to create a theoretical RX 7950 XTX that could compete with the RTX 4090. However, AMD would need to radically increase the chip&apos;s power draw to do so.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Nvidia Ends Supply of GeForce RTX 3060 Ti Chips, Say Chinese Sources ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-ends-supply-of-geforce-rtx-3060-ti-chips-say-chinese-sources</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Nvidia is said to be ceasing GA104 GPU production, while AIBs gear up to pack warehouses with shiny new RTX 4060 family products. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">MNttKNSSBH6iJCkbnvnEUi</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ugK4TVq8vZa33CGWQduuQT-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 16 May 2023 15:10:21 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 10:05:08 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Mark Tyson ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/56vqMYLDaKRHPhHZgbADFR.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Mark&#039;s enthusiasm for computers dampened at an early age by the rubber-keyed Sinclair Spectrum 48K and feelings of Commodore 64 envy. However, in the mid-80s, hope in a digital future was rekindled by the purchase of an Atari 520 STe. Since that time Mark has used a multitude of computers for fun and professional endeavors. He often owned both Macs and PCs but went cold on the former after OS9 was killed off, and warmed to the latter with the introduction of Windows XP.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Early work years were spent in artwork and reprographics but in the late noughties, Mark started to blog about computers, Taiwanese food culture, and guitar design. This activity led to a full-time position writing about breaking PC tech news for HEXUS, for the best part of a decade. When HEXUS was abruptly closed, Mark helped with the foundation of Club386, before finding a new home at Tom&#039;s Hardware.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
When not wearing through the keycap legends on his PC keyboards, Mark can be found wandering the computer malls of Taiwan&#039;s neon-lit conurbations and enjoying local and international cuisine.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ugK4TVq8vZa33CGWQduuQT-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Nvidia]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Farewell GeForce RTX 3060 Ti]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Farewell GeForce RTX 3060 Ti]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Farewell GeForce RTX 3060 Ti]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ugK4TVq8vZa33CGWQduuQT-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Nvidia graphics card makers, sometimes referred to as add-in-board (AIB) partners, are in the middle of a big changeover, according to sources speaking to China&apos;s <a href="https://benchlife.info/nvidia-seem-start-selling-geforce-rtx-3060-ti-gpu-kits-to-aic/">Benchlife</a>. The tech site confirmed with its AIB sources that production of RTX 4060 family graphics cards was ramping up. It sought this confirmation after Chinese tech BBS sources indicated that Nvidia had "stopped supplying GeForce RTX 3060 Ti chips."<br><br>The <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3060-ti-founders-edition-review">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060 Ti</a> has had a good run as a midrange GPU contender and currently sits at number 22 in our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html">GPU benchmarks hierarchy</a> for rasterization performance, and number 19 for ray tracing performance. It scored well in reviews when it debuted in early 2021, with the main dampener being its availability at anything close to its official $399 MSRP — this was during the peak crypto-craze of 2020–2022, in case you&apos;ve been trying to wipe that time period from your memory. There were also modest concerns about potential limits from having just 8GB of VRAM, which still remain and will likewise apply to future 8GB cards.<br><br>The RTX 3060 Ti is no longer on our current list of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">best graphics cards for gaming</a>, mostly due to updates that have introduced newer models like the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-review">RTX 4070</a>. With the touted imminent arrival of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/alleged-launch-dates-for-nvidia-rtx-4060-ti-and-rtx-4050-leak">RTX 4060 series</a>, expected to offer regular and Ti SKUs in both 8GB and 16GB VRAM models, it seems right to divert any RTX 3060 Ti resources to producing the faster and more efficient latest generation products.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1120px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="ZD4VAYqXQzta7cuw7PXhET" name="rtx-3060-main.jpg" alt="Farewell GeForce RTX 3060 Ti" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZD4VAYqXQzta7cuw7PXhET.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1120" height="630" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Nvidia)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Traditionally, the GeForce RTX xx60-class graphics cards rank among the biggest sellers for Nvidia and its AIBs. The <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/rtx-3060-drops-from-first-place-in-latest-steam-hardware-survey">most recent Steam Hardware Survey</a> has the RTX 3060, RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, GTX 1060, and RTX 2060 all ranked in the top five most popular graphics solutions. As such, Nvidia and its partners will want to have warehouses well-stocked with these new graphics cards, ready to roll out between the end of May to mid-July.<br><br>There are reportedly still quite a lot of GA104 GPUs in the channel — that&apos;s the GPU in the RTX 3060 Ti, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3070-founders-edition-review">RTX 3070</a>, and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3070-ti-review">RTX 3070 Ti</a> graphics cards. With the RTX 4060 family launch purportedly so close, there may be a chance to get one of the RTX 3060 Ti cards at a good discount. Certainly we wouldn&apos;t suggest paying anywhere close to $400 for the soon-to-be-replaced cards.<br><br>The question of discounts for last-gen stock also raises the specter of pricing for the new RTX 4060 family. Nvidia&apos;s RTX 40-series pricing has been widely criticized by reviewers and the public. Its current cheapest <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/nvidia-ada-lovelace-and-geforce-rtx-40-series-everything-we-know">Ada Lovelace GPU</a> is the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-review">$599 RTX 4070</a> (non-Ti) model with 12GB of VRAM. That&apos;s a big step above the GeForce RTX 3060 Ti launch price ($399), so we should expect some of that gap to be filled with models like the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/rtx-4060-ti-16gb-rumored-to-have-165w-tdp">RTX 4060 Ti 16GB</a>, RTX 4060 Ti 8GB, and RTX 4060 8GB. Hopefully, those last two will land at or under the $399 mark.<br><br>Some pressure will also be exerted by AMD&apos;s new entry-to-midrange hope, the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/sapphire-radeon-rx-7600-leak">Radeon RX 7600</a>, which we reckon could debut at $299 (based on rumors). It&apos;s set to launch by the end of the month, according to leaks. How it will stack up against AMD&apos;s existing RX 66xx model cards remains to be seen.<br><br>In summary, it makes sense for Nvidia to halt production of its previous generation midrange part. Ampere chips are being retired as their Ada Lovelace successors become available. There&apos;s no official confirmation from Nvidia, but with multiple sources and a healthy dash of common sense, there&apos;s little doubt that Ampere GPUs are on the way out.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ How To Enable DLSS 3 Frame Generation in Windows 10 ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/enable-frame-generation-windows-10</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Armed with an RTX 4070 and a need for more fps, I used AI to almost double my FPS. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">NXvjgm6WoRUa488XrLiM2a</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/knC59DyYG3ni9VVCfMXgWL-1280-80.png" type="image/png" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sun, 14 May 2023 10:15:49 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 10:07:40 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Windows]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Software]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Operating Systems]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Les Pounder ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mZ2MebAz6hhKR6vLUDUbsc.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Les Pounder is a creative technologist and for seven years has created projects to educate and inspire minds both young and old. He has worked with the Raspberry Pi Foundation to write and deliver their teacher training programme &quot;Picademy&quot;.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/png" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/knC59DyYG3ni9VVCfMXgWL-1280-80.png">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Tom&#039;s Hardware]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Enabling Frame Generation in WIndows 10]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Enabling Frame Generation in WIndows 10]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Enabling Frame Generation in WIndows 10]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/knC59DyYG3ni9VVCfMXgWL-1280-80.png" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>I recently bought an <a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-review&sa=D&source=editors&ust=1684040050686003&usg=AOvVaw27wu-NQ7yn-1lmNZIfrs20">Nvidia RTX 4070 Founders Edition</a>, upgrading from an <a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3060-ti-founders-edition-review&sa=D&source=editors&ust=1684040050686264&usg=AOvVaw2HsVemcorkClqILjRrOepm">RTX 3060 Ti Founders Edition</a>  which was great for 1080p gaming, but started to creak at 1440p. I had to turn down the settings to play Cyberpunk 2077, The Ascent and even Forza Horizon 5.</p><p>The Nvidia RTX 4070 seemed like the<a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html&sa=D&source=editors&ust=1684040050686557&usg=AOvVaw1PAFRRHFInPf1gILWsJ2XR"> best GPU</a> for me. It is a mid-range card that would work well with my AMD Ryzen 5 5600X CPU and 32GB of DDR4 RAM. Installation was a breeze, drivers updated and I launched Cyberpunk 2077. I went into Settings >> Graphics and expected Frame Generation to be ready, but it was grayed out.</p><p>I’m running Windows 10 22H2 and unbeknownst to me, hardware accelerated GPU scheduling was not enabled. In Windows 11 it is enabled by default, perhaps another means to <a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-10-no-major-updates-after-22h2&sa=D&source=editors&ust=1684040050686985&usg=AOvVaw0bD183OxXaoN1ePZATjaIl">encourage users to upgrade?</a> </p><h2 id="what-is-optical-multi-frame-generation">What is Optical Multi Frame Generation?</h2><p>Optical Multi Frame Generation was introduced in DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling) and generates frames using AI to analyze “two sequential in-game images and calculates motion vector data for objects and elements that appear in the frame” The frames are fed into a neural network along with engine and optical flow motion vectors to produce a combined DLSS-generated, with DLSS 3 said to boost frame rates by up to 4x when compared to non DLSS methods.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wrEmxSgqEhdCytWcRj2MEA.jpg" alt="Frame Generation Off" /><figcaption>Frame Generation Off<small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6LFNqNHMu3EFdxgxpzV2i8.jpg" alt="Frame Generation On" /><figcaption>Frame Generation On<small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>In our non-scientific test (our GPU Editor <a href="mailto:jarred.walton@futurenet.com">Jarred Walton</a>has all the <a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-review&sa=D&source=editors&ust=1684040050688106&usg=AOvVaw3mxTU6TiLnJjjAP8vmH5Jc">in-depth technical data on the RTX 4070</a>) we went from 45fps to 75fps with frame generation, an impressive boost given the mid-range spec of our build.</p><h2 id="update-your-drivers-and-games">Update Your Drivers and Games</h2><p>Before you start the process, ensure that you are running the latest drivers for your Nvidia RTX 40 series card, and that your games are updated. For my test I used Cyberpunk 2077, which recently saw a ray tracing overdrive update and I set this as my target.</p><h2 id="how-to-enable-hardware-accelerated-gpu-scheduling">How To Enable Hardware-Accelerated GPU Scheduling</h2><p>Introduced in Windows 10 May 2020 update, hardware-accelerated GPU scheduling enables Windows to offload most of the GPU scheduling tasks to a dedicated GPU-based scheduling processor. In Windows 10 we need to enable this feature, Windows 11 automatically enables hardware-accelerated GPU scheduling.</p><p>1. <strong>Navigate to the Graphics settings menu</strong>. You can get there by searching for Graphics in Windows and clicking on Graphics Settings.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:816px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:83.21%;"><img id="" name="1684037220.png" alt="Finding graphics settings" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GeShYxUUt3NfLzfeTyNnLd.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="816" height="679" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>2. <strong>Toggle on Hardware-accelerated GPU scheduling</strong>. </p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:759px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.44%;"><img id="" name="1684037299.png" alt="toggle hardware-accelerated gpu scheduling to on" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7i7CokcLxqKTE6EasoSPfm.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="759" height="565" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>3. <strong>Reboot </strong>your PC.</p><h2 id="using-dlss-3-0-frame-generation">Using DLSS 3.0 Frame Generation</h2><p>1. In your game, <strong>go to the Graphics menu </strong>in settings.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1999px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:61.68%;"><img id="" name="1684037404.png" alt="Graphics menu in settings in Cyberpunk 2077" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BTNhLWkSHuY4N6eEM9UbJB.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1999" height="1233" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>2. <strong>Click on DLSS Frame Generation</strong>.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1999px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:66.08%;"><img id="" name="1684037435.png" alt="click on DLSS Frame Generation" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/T4PevxNfZReURzvKLse8XE.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1999" height="1321" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>3. <strong>Start your game</strong>.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1999px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.28%;"><img id="" name="1684037468.png" alt="Cyberpunk 2077" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/X2mgQGhm8yxhndrAd7LzQJ.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1999" height="1125" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Enjoy your smoother gameplay. </p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Why Does 4K Gaming Require so Much VRAM? ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/why-does-4k-gaming-require-so-much-vram</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Many games are starting to push well beyond 8GB of VRAM use, particularly at 4K. We discuss what's going on behind the scenes that makes 4K much more demanding on your graphics card. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">AW6uxwSFuEMDV4GYCdDL5</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/veUWZoXvvWbemh4iR4hapd-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sat, 13 May 2023 13:00:40 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:45:33 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Virtual Reality]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jarred Walton ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8uFgSGcCzKdFTTQdqonCPi.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jarred&#039;s love of computers dates back to the dark ages, when his dad brought home a DOS 2.3 PC and he left his C-64 behind. He eventually built his first custom PC in 1990 with a 286 12MHz, only to discover it was already woefully outdated when Wing Commander released a few months later. He holds a BS in Computer Science from Brigham Young University and has been working as a tech journalist since 2004, writing for AnandTech, Maximum PC, and PC Gamer. From the first S3 Virge &#039;3D decelerators&#039; to today&#039;s GPUs, Jarred keeps up with all the latest graphics trends and is the one to ask about game performance.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/veUWZoXvvWbemh4iR4hapd-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Shutterstock]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Gamer frustrated with high VRAM use at 4K]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Gamer frustrated with high VRAM use at 4K]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Gamer frustrated with high VRAM use at 4K]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/veUWZoXvvWbemh4iR4hapd-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>When you&apos;re looking to buy one of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">best graphics cards</a>, performance often ranks as the most important aspect (along with pricing for many of us, naturally) — check our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html">GPU benchmarks hierarchy</a> if you want to see how the various cards stack up. But lately, we&apos;re seeing more games that seem to need lots of VRAM, possibly 16GB or more. <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/star-wars-jedi-survivor-patched-performance-amd-and-nvidia-gpus-tested"><em>Star Wars Jedi: Survivor</em></a>, <em>The Last of Us Part 1</em>, <em>Warhammer 40K: Darktide</em>, <em>Hogwarts Legacy</em>, <em>Final Fantasy 7 Remake</em>, <em>Elden Ring</em>... the list is getting quite large for games that can exceed 8GB or even 12GB of VRAM use, depending on your chosen settings and resolution. What exactly is going on, though, and how much VRAM do you really need?<br><br>Superficially, you might think it&apos;s just a case of higher resolutions naturally requiring more VRAM. 3840x2160 (4K) is four times as many pixels as 1920x1080 (1080p), and 2.25X as many pixels as 2560x1440 (1440p). But while that can dramatically increase the number of calculations your GPU needs to perform, on its own it doesn&apos;t actually make a game use that much more VRAM.<br><br>Games have lots of buffers these days. There are framebuffers, depth buffers, geometry buffers, buffers for shadow maps and lighting, deferred rendering buffers, and potentially buffers for upscaling techniques like DLSS and FSR2. There can also be additional storage requirements for ray tracing, like the bounding volume hierarchy (BVH) structure. Anyway, not to get too far into the weeds, but there are many things that need memory.<br><br>Those memory requirements scale with resolution. For the framebuffer as an example, going to a resolution that&apos;s four times higher will generally mean using four times as much memory. Doing that for each buffer seems like it might be a big deal. But when you do the math, it&apos;s actually not that bad.<br><br>Using a 1080p resolution means 8,294,400 bytes are required for each buffer (1920 * 1080 pixels, with four bytes per pixel). 4K quadruples that to 33,177,600 bytes, while the in-between 1440p requires 14,745,600 bytes. Suppose there are ten such buffers used in a game. The difference between 4K and 1080p would still only end up being about 237 MiB — and there may be real-time compression / decompression techniques present in modern GPUs that reduce the storage requirements for certain buffers.<br><br>Most modern graphics cards have at least 8GB of VRAM, so an increase of around 0.2GB in memory requirements shouldn&apos;t matter much. But if you&apos;ve ever gone from running a game mostly fine at 1440p to seeing your graphics card choke at 4K, you know something is causing problems. It may not be the larger buffers causing issues at 4K, but there&apos;s clearly something going on.<br><br>(Side note: Nvidia let us know that it&apos;s current architectures do not compress the framebuffers, "based on cost/benefit tradeoffs." However, we&apos;re not certain if AMD GPUs compress the framebuffer or not. Other buffers may or may not use some form of lossless compression, depending on the particular buffer and application.)</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1592px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.22%;"><img id="" name="Nvidia-GeForec-RTX-30-Series.jpg" alt="GeForce RTX 30-series lineup" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Q9GSWttttTfCjrouJWdqad.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1592" height="895" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="caption-text">The RTX 3070 fell down, due to having only 8GB VRAM. </span><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Nvidia)</span></figcaption></figure><p>The actual culprit ends up being all the textures, which includes shadow maps, environment maps, and any other texture-related items that get stored in VRAM. You&apos;re probably saying, "Duh! Everyone already knows that." But it&apos;s not just a case of there being higher quality textures. There&apos;s more going on than you might have considered.<br><br>Take a game like <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/far-cry-6-benchmarks"><em>Far Cry 6</em></a> as an example. This is one of the games in our current test suite where we know it can experience VRAM issues when you have the HD texture pack loaded and try to run it at 4K on a graphics card with 8GB of VRAM. <em>Far Cry 6</em> will run just fine at 1440p with ultra settings (but without ray tracing) on the RTX 3070, averaging just over 100 fps. Bump to 4K however and performance can tank. Sometimes it will get just under 60 fps, but in testing we&apos;ll also get instances where it only runs at 10–20 fps. It&apos;s a bit weird in that it fluctuates so much between runs, but that&apos;s a different story.<br><br><em>Total War: Warhammer 3</em> is another game that can show a big drop in performance when going from 1440p to 4K on cards with 8GB VRAM. The RTX 3070 averages 65 fps at 1440p ultra and only 28 fps at 4K ultra, a 57% decrease in performance. AMD&apos;s RX 6650 XT drops from 36 fps at 1440p to just 14 fps at 4K, a 61% drop. Meanwhile, an RTX 3060 with 12GB goes from 44 fps to 23 fps — still a significant hit to performance, but now it&apos;s &apos;only&apos; 48% slower. That has all the earmarks of running out of VRAM, but what exactly is happening behind the scenes?</p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MipMap_Example_STS101.jpg"><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:66.64%;"><img id="" name="mipmapping-example-wikipedia.jpg" alt="Example mimap, credit to Wikipedia" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wzMq7baBRdbPQUhumEAHAh.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1280" height="853" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="caption-text"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MipMap_Example_STS101.jpg" target="_blank">Example mimap, via Wikipedia Commons</a> </span><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Wikipedia)</span></figcaption></figure></a><p>The main culprit is textures, and it ties into something called <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mipmap" target="_blank">MIP mapping</a>. Mipmaps have been used in computer graphics for decades (they were invented by Lance Williams in 1983, according to Wikipedia). The idea is to pre-calculate lower resolution versions of a texture, typically using a high quality resize operation like bicubic filtering. That might be too expensive to run in real-time, or at least it was back in the earlier days of computer graphics, so game developers would pre-compute the mipmaps.<br><br>The benefit of doing so is that you can improve the image quality, reducing moiré patterns, aliasing, and other artifacts. But a potentially bigger benefit is that mipmaps can also reduce the amount of memory required to store all the textures — a GPU only needs to keep the highest accessed resolution of a texture in VRAM (along with all the lower resolution mipmaps as well, but those combined are less than half the size of the primary mipmap). That last bit is the key to understanding the difficulty with 4K compared to 1440p, but it&apos;s not very clear, so let&apos;s unpack that a bit.</p><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">Optimizing Memory Use</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text">I should note that there are different ways of handling texture storage in VRAM. What I am describing here is one way of handling things, where for example only the 1K and lower resolution mipmaps are loaded into VRAM if 1K is the highest resolution that&apos;s been accessed. I&apos;m also not accounting for things like virtual textures, where only part of a texture is put into VRAM.<br><br>However, it can be beneficial to keep everything in VRAM if possible. For example, this would avoid a potential stutter when an object goes from using 512x512 to 1Kx1K textures and the higher resolution texture needs to be pulled into VRAM. This is why some games have strict VRAM requirements (<em>Red Dead Redemption 2</em> and <em>Doom Eternal</em> come to mind — though note that <em>RDR2</em> even at 4K and max settings only needs a bit less than 8GB). If you don&apos;t have enough VRAM, they&apos;ll try to prevent you from even attempting to use certain settings.<br><br>How a game engine actually implements VRAM allocation can vary, in other words. DirectX 12 and Vulkan in particular give developers a lot more control over texture management.</p></div></div><p>Typically, when a game engine applies textures, it will use a texture resolution that&apos;s one step higher than the number of pixels (proportionally) that the object will cover on the display — assuming such a texture resolution is available. So let&apos;s say there&apos;s an unobstructed rectangular polygon that covers a third of a 1080p display. That would mean the polygon occupies 640x360 pixels, so at most the game engine would use a 1024x1024 texture for it.<br><br>Move the viewport closer to the polygon, so that it exactly fills the whole display. Now it covers 1920x1080 pixels, and the game engine could select a 2048x2048 mipmap. Move closer still so that only half of the polygon is visible but it fills the whole screen. Then and only then would (typical) mipmapping opt for a 4096x4096 texture — assuming one is available.<br><br>What that means is that games that support 2K textures (2048x2048 resolution) are effectively "maxed out" on texture quality if you&apos;re only gaming at 1080p. And with the more complex geometry and environments used in modern games, most polygons and textures are likely getting nowhere near needing even 2K textures — 1K would suffice. Even 1440p will often only need to use 2K (or lower resolution) textures. That&apos;s because, even if 4K textures (4096x4096) are technically available, most polygons will cover far less than 2048 pixels in width or height, the exception being if you&apos;re very close to the surface so that it passes that threshold.<br><br>You can probably see where this is going. Bump up the display resolution to 4K, and suddenly the game engine and GPU will see a need to store and use higher resolution textures in VRAM far more often. The image quality probably won&apos;t even increase that much, but the VRAM requirements can basically triple. Hello fractionally higher image quality, goodbye performance — at least if the game exceeds the capacity of your VRAM.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zacNVADHt5ZdWoaTDKFAK9.jpg" alt="Redfall texture quality comparison" /><figcaption>Epic quality textures<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/F8UCsvhLQErppmkDBXVHd9.jpg" alt="Redfall texture quality comparison" /><figcaption>High quality textures<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yHELD89NBwYGXcdJG8MC2A.jpg" alt="Redfall texture quality comparison" /><figcaption>Medium quality textures<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Axfh6ZoePoCT8FTHtokCx8.jpg" alt="Redfall texture quality comparison" /><figcaption>Low quality textures<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>The above gallery shows <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/redfall-gpu-benchmarks"><em>Redfall</em></a> at epic settings, except we&apos;ve turned down the texture quality to high, medium, and low in the subsequent images. (You&apos;ll want to view the full-size images on a 4K display if you&apos;re trying to pixel peep.) The differences, in this case, are very limited, with only the carpet on the right really showing a loss in fidelity at the medium preset, while the low preset shows a reduction in detail on some of the other objects. While we don&apos;t know for certain, we&apos;d guess that the epic setting allows for 2K textures, high uses 1K textures, then 512 for medium, and 256 for low. Maybe we&apos;re off by a factor of two in each case, but either way, you can see that it&apos;s not a dramatic change.<br><br>There&apos;s plenty of debate that could be had over whether 2K and 4K textures are even necessary. Most GPUs can do a 2X upscale of a texture without drastically reducing the image quality, and things like DLSS, FSR2, and XeSS can potentially regain some of the quality through accumulation of data over multiple frames. Certainly, using 8K textures wouldn&apos;t help image quality on 4K and lower resolution displays — and some people would say that a simple sharpening filter looks better than extreme resolution textures.<br><br>It&apos;s not just about texture resolution, either. Textures are typically stored in a compressed format: BTC (Block Truncation Coding), S3TC, DirectX&apos;s BCn variants, or some other similar format. These formats all have one major thing in common: they&apos;re high speed and allow for random access, with compression ratios typically falling in the 4X to 8X range. Algorithms like JPEG can achieve much better compression ratios, but they can&apos;t be accessed randomly.<br><br>This is one of the reasons why <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-uses-neural-network-for-innovative-texture-compression-method" target="_blank">Nvidia&apos;s Neural Texture Compression</a> (NTC) sounds so promising. Figuring out ways to store higher-quality versions of textures in the same amount of memory, or use similar quality textures with potentially one tenth as much memory, would be very beneficial. But textures need to be accessible in a random fashion, in real-time, and that adds complexity to the task. AI algorithms may be better able to cope with this than traditional approaches.<br><br>But NTC isn&apos;t here yet, at least not for shipping games, and for practical use it may end up requiring new hardware and architectural changes. That means it might also require an Nvidia GPU, so unless Nvidia can get it into a future DirectX (and Vulkan) specification, it could be a while before it gains traction. We&apos;ll have to wait and see, in other words, even if it sounds really promising. (Check out the article and look at some of the images, and then imagine if games could cut texture memory use by 90%. It&apos;s possible but perhaps not fully practical for most graphics cards just yet.)<br><br>Back to the subject. Because of the jump texture storage requirements — and yes, larger buffers, more geometry, etc. — brought on by moving to 4K rendering, upscaling technologies like DLSS, FSR2, and XeSS also become a lot more useful as performance boosters. We see this regularly in testing, where the benefits of 2X upscaling (i.e. Quality mode) at 1080p may only be a moderate 10–20 percent increase in performance, while at 4K you could see a 50% improvement. With upscaling, even at 4K, the game engine would have the memory requirements of a lower resolution. (Yes, CPU bottlenecks can also be a factor, but even on modest cards like an RTX 3050, DLSS scaling tends to be far better at higher resolutions.)</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:736px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.39%;"><img id="" name="1659381850.jpg" alt="Dell G3223Q 4K Gaming Monitor" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GyEr9evq6wYt5Cwe8zgViR.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="736" height="415" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="caption-text">The Dell G3223Q is an excellent 4K 144Hz gaming monitor </span><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Dell)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Whether or not you want to game at 4K, whether or not you want to enable the highest quality settings, and whether you want to enable some form of upscaling: These are all ultimately a choice you can make. There&apos;s compromise either way: higher image quality on the one hand, higher performance on the other. Regardless, understanding exactly why 4K represents such a big jump in performance requirements from your GPU and VRAM is useful.<br><br>Even while AMD has been pushing the benefits of more VRAM, that&apos;s often been limited to its highest-end GPUs. With the RX 6000-series, you needed an RX 6800 or higher to get 16GB. The RX 6700/6750 XT dropped that to 12GB, while the mainstream RX 6600-series cards are back to 8GB and the RX 6500/6400 have just 4GB. Not surprisingly, the RX 6700-series parts were primarily marketed as being good for 1440p, while the RX 6600-series GPUs were targeted at 1080p gaming. Nvidia hasn&apos;t talked about VRAM as much, but higher VRAM capacities typically only come on higher priced parts — the RTX 3060 being an exception to that rule.<br><br>With upcoming graphics cards, we&apos;re certainly going to hear more noise about VRAM capacities. All indications are that Nvidia&apos;s <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/release-date-of-nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-ti-8gb-revealed">rumored RTX 4060 Ti</a> will come with 8GB of VRAM (and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-to-unveil-three-geforce-rtx-4060-series-cards-in-may">possibly a 16GB variant</a> as well), and the same goes for <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-radeon-rx-7600-specs-seemingly-leaked">AMD&apos;s alleged RX 7600</a>. Except, Nvidia will probably charge quite a bit more money for its 4060 Ti card, either model, and it will likely be more of an RX 7700-series competitor (whenever such cards arrive). But neither the 4060 Ti 8GB nor the RX 7600 are likely to focus on 4K gaming, and it&apos;s very likely they&apos;ll still prove adequate in most games for 1080p and potentially 1440p at maxed-out settings.<br><br>And if not, turning down texture and shadow quality settings a notch should keep them viable. Go look at those <em>Redfall</em> images above again, comparing the epic versus high texture quality. <em>Redfall</em> and many other games simply don&apos;t show much of a visual benefit to using the highest quality textures possible. We might like the idea of having 16GB or more VRAM on all future graphics cards, but realistically there&apos;s still a place for mainstream parts with only 8GB.</p><p><em>Editor&apos;s note: I reached out to both AMD and Nvidia for comment, sending along an earlier version of the text. Representatives from both companies confirmed that the above explanation of how VRAM works is largely correct, though as always individual games and engines may do things in a different manner.</em></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ AMD Brags That Its Old GPU Beats Nvidia's Old GPU ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-cant-beat-ada-so-brags-about-old-ampere-comparisons</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Sasa Marinkovic, senior director of gaming marketing at AMD, compares the Radeon RX 6800 to the GeForce RTX 3070 — sans ray tracing. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">Lm8JC5LDiz4JiyhVeHqRic</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Lhst3r5mQB7LABvxhpVpU-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 09 May 2023 21:21:58 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:53:58 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Zhiye Liu ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HhmwL5w9ggUtLCPfqGjTi4.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Zhiye’s love for PC hardware began when he accidentally set his Pentium P54CS PC on fire, short-circuiting his entire home. From that day on, he has constantly pursued greater hardware knowledge, which ultimately led him from being a power user to a writer at Tom’s Hardware. When Zhiye’s not covering the latest news on CPUs or GPUs, you can find him overclocking RAM to the latest trance hits.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Lhst3r5mQB7LABvxhpVpU-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[AMD]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                        <media:description><![CDATA[Radeon RX 6800]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Radeon RX 6800]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Radeon RX 6800]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Lhst3r5mQB7LABvxhpVpU-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Although the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top" target="_blank">Radeon RX 7900 series</a> has already launched, AMD&apos;s <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/the-amd-radeon-rx-6800-xt-and-rx-6800-review" target="_blank">Radeon RX 6800</a> continues to be one of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html" target="_blank">best graphics cards</a> in the retail market. Sasa Marinkovic, senior director of gaming marketing at AMD, wants to make sure that consumers don&apos;t forget that, <a href="https://twitter.com/SasaMarinkovic/status/1655927000249569282?s=20" target="_blank">sharing a chart</a> showing the Radeon RX 6800&apos;s dominance over the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3070-founders-edition-review" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 3070</a>.<br><br>Both the Radeon RX 6800 and GeForce RTX 3070 are last-generation products dating back to late 2020. Back then, it didn&apos;t make much sense to compare the two cards because they belonged to different tiers due to their MSRPs. The Radeon RX 6800 hit the market with a $579 MSRP, whereas the GeForce RTX 3070 launched with a $499 MSRP. Of course, neither graphics card retailed at their respective MSRP during 2020–2022.<br><br>Things have thankfully settled down since the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/ethereum-merge-completed" target="_blank">end of Ethereum mining</a>. The <a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814131771">cheapest Radeon RX 6800 has dropped to $479</a>, while the <a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16814137602">GeForce RTX 3070 now starts at $456</a>, making them direct rivals.<br><br>While Nvidia has now launched the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-review" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 4070</a> to replace the GeForce RTX 3070, AMD hasn&apos;t released a successor to the Radeon RX 6800. The GeForce RTX 4070 also enters the market at $599, 20% higher than its predecessor&apos;s MSRP while offering <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-review" target="_blank">GeForce RTX 3080</a>-level performance at lower power requirements. That means pitting the GeForce RTX 4070 against the Radeon RX 6800 sort of misses the point, especially when we expect <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/rtx-4060-ti-late-may-launch-speculation" target="_blank">RTX 4060 Ti</a> to arrive before the end of the month.<br><br>A better comparison will be between the upcoming Radeon RX 7700 (XT) and GeForce RTX 4060 Ti, or between RTX 4070 and whatever equivalently priced GPU AMD wants to ship. But let&apos;s go ahead with AMD&apos;s comparisons for now.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1675px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.24%;"><img id="" name="Sin-título-2.jpg" alt="Radeon RX 6800 vs. GeForce RTX 3070" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aMtxQafdQeaM9ppppBcViK.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1675" height="942" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aMtxQafdQeaM9ppppBcViK.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Sasa Marinkovic/Twitter)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Although the chart claims that the Radeon RX 6800 delivers faster ray tracing (RT) and rasterization performance, Marinkovic later clarified that it was an error. <strong>The above performance figures only apply to rasterization performance.</strong> Oops.<br><br>In Marinkovic&apos;s comparison across 32 games, the Radeon RX 6800 was, on average, 13.4% faster than the GeForce RTX 3070. The performance delta varies between -2% and +31%. The GeForce RTX 3070 only outperformed the Radeon RX 6800 in <em>Metro Exodus</em>, <em>Grand Theft Auto V</em>, and <em>Dota 2</em>, though the performance difference was basically a tie. The tweeted image also highlights how the Radeon RX 6800 offers twice as much onboard memory as the GeForce RTX 3070, a selling point that <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-brags-about-cheaper-16gb-gpus" target="_blank">AMD has been very vocal about</a>.<br><br>AMD tested the two graphics cards at a native 1440p (2560x1440) resolution. However, the chipmaker didn&apos;t clarify which graphics settings it had used for the tests, which is an important piece of data. Nevertheless, AMD&apos;s claims generally align with our own results so there doesn&apos;t seem to be any funny business going on.</p><p>In our test suite across nine games (data from our updated <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html" target="_blank">GPU benchmarks hierarchy</a>, using a 13900K), the Radeon RX 6800 delivered 14.3% higher rasterization performance than the GeForce RTX 3070 at 1440p with Ultra settings. However, the scale tips in the GeForce RTX 3070&apos;s favor when it comes to ray tracing performance. That&apos;s probably the reason why AMD omitted that comparison. The GeForce RTX 3070 offered 17.2% and 14.9% higher ray tracing performance in our 1080p and 1440p tests, respectively, across six demanding ray tracing games.<br><br>Neither AMD&apos;s numbers nor our own testing results include upscaling technologies like <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reference/what-is-nvidia-dlss" target="_blank">DLSS</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-fidelity-fx-super-resolution-2-temporal-upscaling" target="_blank">FSR 2</a>, which could further muddy the waters. Perhaps more importantly, AMD CEO Dr. Lisa Su confirmed a week ago that AMD&apos;s mainstream <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amds-mainstream-rx-7000-gpus-to-arrive-before-july" target="_blank">Radeon RX 7000-series graphics cards</a> will launch before July. She didn&apos;t explicitly state which lineup, so there&apos;s no guarantee that we&apos;ll se an RX 7800 or 7700 by then, but the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-radeon-rx-7600-listed-in-singapore" target="_blank">Radeon RX 7600</a> is expected to arrive within the next month.<br><br>If you&apos;re mostly concerned with rasterization performance, yes, the Radeon RX 6800 can beat the RTX 3070. The RTX 4070 can also beat the 3070 in rasterization performance, by around 30%, which means it&apos;s also beats the RX 6800 by around 13%. Factor in ray tracing and DLSS and the gap would only grow. But really, no one should be purchasing a last-generation graphics card for $480 right now when potential replacements are right around the corner.</p><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/XDf5PcNM.html" id="XDf5PcNM" title="How To Choose A Graphics Card" width="960" height="540" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Jedi: Survivor Receives Its Second Optimization Update ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/jedi-survivor-receives-its-second-optimization-update</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Jedi: Survivor has received a new patch addressing some performance issues that the first patch did not address. Some of these optimizations include reduced hitching and improved RT performance, though additional work is still in progress. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">hvqNTT8AuJvwwxSo85jfni</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tK4YwKhiTa7zxuudvQiMRa-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 09 May 2023 17:46:26 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:50:51 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Video Games]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Aaron Klotz) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Aaron Klotz ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aAk2saHqkgFuTCanz8LnmD.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Aaron began building computers back when he was 8 years old in the mid-2000s, and it’s been a hobby of his ever since then. With a focus on computer hardware, he became an avid member of the Tom’s Hardware forums several years later, helping people solve issues with their PCs. He is now a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware, writing about computer hardware news and more. When not busy playing or writing about computer hardware, he spends his free time playing video games like Star Citizen or Apex Legends.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tK4YwKhiTa7zxuudvQiMRa-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Aaron Klotz]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Jedi: Survivor]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Jedi: Survivor]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Jedi: Survivor]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tK4YwKhiTa7zxuudvQiMRa-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p><em>Star Wars Jedi: Survivor</em> is getting a <a href="https://twitter.com/EAStarWars/status/1655764332515409920">new patch</a> to address a host of issues with the game&apos;s performance. Most notably, the new patch is addressing <em>Jedi: Survivor</em>&apos;s notorious traversal hitching issues and improving its ray tracing performance. The patch should already be out for PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series consoles, with the PC version coming "as soon as possible this week."<br><br>When <em>Jedi: Survivor</em> launched last month, the game received severe criticism for its performance issues on the PC port. These issues affected even the highest-end PC hardware configurations. The issues were so bad that EA released a public apology on Twitter on launch day, promising the game would get fixed through an ongoing process of patches.<br><br>EA was quick to fulfill its promise and the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/jedi-survivor-new-patch-addresses-performance-issues">first patch</a> was released just a few days after <em>Jedi: Survivor</em> launched. It addressed a lot of the game-breaking performance issues and significantly improved performance on most systems. We saw these improvements firsthand in our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/star-wars-jedi-survivor-patched-performance-amd-and-nvidia-gpus-tested">performance analysis of <em>Jedi: Survivor</em></a>, noting how the game ran decently well on mid-range and high-end GPU hardware. We even saw surprisingly good results with 8GB cards like the RTX 3070, which exhibited good performance results compared to AMD&apos;s higher-capacity RX 6000-series counterparts.<br><br>However, the first patch didn&apos;t fix everything, and the game is still plagued by a number of minor to moderate performance issues, along with some game-breaking bugs.</p><div class="see-more see-more--clipped"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet hawk-ignore" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Patch 4 for #StarWarsJediSurvivor arrives on consoles on Tuesday, May 9. Patch 4 on PC will deploy as soon as possible this week… stay tuned for updates.Get details on what to expect in these patches: https://t.co/LdyqGh0Azr pic.twitter.com/z5BQxNwboX<a href="https://twitter.com/EAStarWars/status/1655764332515409920">May 9, 2023</a></p></blockquote><div class="see-more__filter"></div></div><p>This is where this latest patch comes in, aiming to address more of these problems. One of the best improvements in the patch addresses the game&apos;s notorious traversal hitching problems, where frame rates could drop anytime Cal Kestis is running around the game world. Respawn is optimizing the game&apos;s streaming budgets to smooth out performance when new textures and assets are swapped into main memory and/or graphics memory.<br><br>The rest of the performance improvements include better ray-tracing performance thanks to updated occlusion behavior that reduces idle time stalls in the game, performance improvements for some of the visual effects, and improved non-raytracing performance when enabling or disabling the game&apos;s RT mode. Hopefully the improvements will take care of some of the <a href="https://youtu.be/ijYQO-P8bv0" target="_blank">rendering issues</a> we noticed.<br><br>Sadly this second major update isn&apos;t close to fixing all the performance issues in <em>Jedi: Survivor</em>, but the developers have given us a glimpse of what the development team is working on right now, with three major performance fixes aimed at future patches for PC users. The first focuses on improving performance with Intel 12th Gen Alder Lake and 13th Gen Raptor Lake CPUs with efficiency cores. The second is a general improvement to CPU and GPU utilization while reducing idle time with RT enabled or disabled. Finally, the third involves further hitching improvements revolving around RT data streaming, asset streaming, and "a gap" in the game&apos;s prebuilt shaders.<br><br>For the rest of the bug fixes, be sure to check out the full EA report <a href="https://www.ea.com/games/starwars/jedi/jedi-survivor/patch-notes">here.</a></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Nvidia Uses Neural Network for Innovative Texture Compression Method ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-uses-neural-network-for-innovative-texture-compression-method</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Nvidia introduces Neural Texture Compression for material texture compression. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">6irkM6GcEXRkCRKojdX3D</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AR3DP7GPPxWNUM7WpY3uc-1280-80.png" type="image/png" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sat, 06 May 2023 18:36:35 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:42:28 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ ashilov@gmail.com (Anton Shilov) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Anton Shilov ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uMZ5kNphxA2Ut6whdLaSQV.png ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Anton Shilov has been in the PC industry since 1990s playing games, building PCs, and writing stories about pretty much everything that relates to PCs, Macs, smartphones, tablets, and even fab equipment. Over his career, he has worked at a variety of high-ranking websites, including AnandTech, EE Times, TechRadar, X-bit labs, and now Tom&#039;s Hardware. When Anton is not reading or writing about something high-tech, he is probably watching a good movie, playing a video game, or spending time with his family.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/png" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AR3DP7GPPxWNUM7WpY3uc-1280-80.png">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Nvidia]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Nvidia]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Nvidia]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Nvidia]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AR3DP7GPPxWNUM7WpY3uc-1280-80.png" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Nvidia this week introduced its new texture compression method that provides four times higher resolution than traditional Block Truncation Coding (BTC, BC) methods while having similar storage requirements. The core concept of the proposed approach is to compress multiple material textures and their mipmap chains collectively and then decompress them using a neural network that is trained for a particular pattern it decompresses. In theory, the method can even impact future GPU architectures. Yet, for now the method has limitations.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2124px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:52.40%;"><img id="" name="Random-Access-Neural-Compression-of-Material-Textures-1.png" alt="Nvidia" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TCpUjaRtMk9x8M8ZK9XoR3.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="2124" height="1113" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TCpUjaRtMk9x8M8ZK9XoR3.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Nvidia)</span></figcaption></figure><h2 id="new-requirements">New Requirements</h2><p>Recent advancements in real-time rendering for video games have approached the visual quality of movies due to usage of such techniques as physically-based shading for photorealistic modeling of materials, ray tracing, path tracing, and denoising for accurate global illumination. Meanwhile, texturing techniques have not really advanced at a similar pace mostly because texture compression methods essentially remained the same as in the late 1990s, which is why in some cases many objects look blurry in close proximity. </p><p>The reason for this is because GPUs still rely on block-based texture compression methods. These techniques have very efficient hardware implementations (as fixed-function hardware to support them have evolved for over two decades), random access, data locality, and near-lossless quality. However, they are designed for moderate compression ratios between 4x and 8x and are limited to a maximum of 4 channels. Modern real-time renderers often require more material properties, necessitating multiple textures. </p><h2 id="nvidia-apos-s-method">Nvidia&apos;s Method</h2><p>This is where Nvidia&apos;s <a href="https://research.nvidia.com/publication/2023-08_random-access-neural-compression-material-textures">Random-Access Neural Compression of Material Textures</a> (NTC) comes into play. Nvidia&apos;s technology enables two additional levels of detail (16x more texels, so four times higher resolution) while maintaining similar storage requirements as traditional texture compression methods. This means that compressed textures with per-material optimization with resolutions up to 8192 x 8192 (8K) are now feasible. </p><p>To do so, NTC exploits redundancies spatially, across mipmap levels, and across different material channels. This ensures that texture detail is preserved when viewers are in close proximity to an object, something that modern methods cannot enable.  </p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2182px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:45.19%;"><img id="" name="Random-Access-Neural-Compression-of-Material-Textures-5.png" alt="Nvidia" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3DyTuKB46fsgX9jNTfmKT.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="2182" height="986" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3DyTuKB46fsgX9jNTfmKT.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Nvidia)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Nvidia claims that NTC textures are decompressed using matrix-multiplication hardware such as tensor cores operating in a SIMD-cooperative manner, which means that the new technology does not require any special purpose hardware and can be used on virtually all modern Nvidia GPUs. But perhaps the biggest concern is that every texture requires its own optimized neural network to decompress, which puts some additional load on game developers. </p><p>Nvidia says that resulting texture quality at these aggressively low bitrates is said to be comparable to or better than recent image compression standards, such as AVIF and JPEG XL, which are not designed for real-time decompression with random access anyway.</p><h2 id="practical-advantages-and-disadvantages">Practical Advantages and Disadvantages</h2><p>Indeed, images demonstrated by Nvidia clearly show that NTC is better than traditional Block Coding-based technologies. However, Nvidia admits that its method is slower than traditional methods (it took a GPU 1.15 ms to render a 4K image with NTC textures and 0.49 ms to render a 4K image with BC textures), but it provides 16x more texels albeit with stochastic filtering. </p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2125px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:46.73%;"><img id="" name="Random-Access-Neural-Compression-of-Material-Textures-8.png" alt="Nvidia" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YTSgo6n8U9WHk72oBWDWq.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="2125" height="993" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YTSgo6n8U9WHk72oBWDWq.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Nvidia)</span></figcaption></figure><p>While NTC is more resource-intensive than conventional hardware-accelerated texture filtering, the results show that it delivers high performance and is suitable for real-time rendering. Moreover, in complex scenes using a fully-featured renderer, the cost of NTC can be partially offset by the simultaneous execution of other tasks (e.g., ray tracing) due to the GPU&apos;s ability to hide latency. </p><p>Meanwhile, rendering with NTC can be accelerated new hardware architectures, increased number of dedicated matrix-multiplication units that might used, increased cache sizes, and register usage. Actually, some of the optimizations can be made on the programmable level.  </p><p>Nvidia also admits that NTC is not a completely lossless method of texture compression and produce visual degradation at low bitrates and has some limitations, such as sensitivity to channel correlation, uniform resolution requirements, and limited benefits at larger camera distances. Furthermore, advantages are proportional to channel count and may not be as significant for lower channel counts. Also, since NTC is optimized for material textures and always decompresses all material channels, it makes it potentially unsuitable for use in different rendering contexts. </p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2183px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:60.60%;"><img id="" name="Random-Access-Neural-Compression-of-Material-Textures-9.png" alt="Nvidia" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oGYhax9EtWpggTSUx7wQe3.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="2183" height="1323" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oGYhax9EtWpggTSUx7wQe3.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Nvidia)</span></figcaption></figure><p>While the advantage of NTC is that it does not use fixed-function texture filtering hardware to produce its superior results, this is also its key disadvantage. Texture filtering cost is computationally expensive, which is why for now anisotropic filtering with NTC is not feasible for real-time rendering. Meanwhile, stochastic filtering can introduce flickering.</p><p>But despite limitations, NTC&apos;s compression of multiple channels and mipmap levels together produces a result that exceeds industry standards. Nvidia researchers believe that its approach is paving the way for cinematic-quality visuals in real-time rendering and is practical for memory-constrained graphics applications. Yet, it introduces a modest timing overhead compared to simple BTC algorithms, which impacts performance.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2189px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:117.68%;"><img id="" name="Random-Access-Neural-Compression-of-Material-Textures-15.png" alt="Nvidia" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eomocwmGLZH5yvmQerrvt3.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="2189" height="2576" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eomocwmGLZH5yvmQerrvt3.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Nvidia)</span></figcaption></figure><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/SzkW6ASo.html" id="SzkW6ASo" title="Buy the Right Graphics Card" width="1920" height="1080" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Radeon RX 5600 XT Gets Modified With 12GB of VRAM ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/rx-5600-xt-modified-with-12gb-of-vram</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ AMD's RX 5600 XT was recently modified with 12GB of speedy GDDR6 memory, significantly improving performance in memory-bound benchmarks. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">uiKiosSBvKRhSMQgES4XuU</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QpfaENjiBsPwCcZJfUxVVj-1280-80.png" type="image/png" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 04 May 2023 17:44:01 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:45:27 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Aaron Klotz) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Aaron Klotz ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aAk2saHqkgFuTCanz8LnmD.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Aaron began building computers back when he was 8 years old in the mid-2000s, and it’s been a hobby of his ever since then. With a focus on computer hardware, he became an avid member of the Tom’s Hardware forums several years later, helping people solve issues with their PCs. He is now a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware, writing about computer hardware news and more. When not busy playing or writing about computer hardware, he spends his free time playing video games like Star Citizen or Apex Legends.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/png" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QpfaENjiBsPwCcZJfUxVVj-1280-80.png">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[AMD]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT 6GB to 12GB mod]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT 6GB to 12GB mod]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT 6GB to 12GB mod]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QpfaENjiBsPwCcZJfUxVVj-1280-80.png" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>YouTuber and graphics card modder Paulo Gomes has upgraded <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMhQGXTsmJM">yet another</a> graphics card with more video memory, this time using an AMD Power Color Radeon RX 5600 XT Red Dragon. The card was modified from 6GB of memory to 12GB of capacity with faster 2GB 16Gbps memory chips.<br><br>The memory mod for this card was more simple compared to the RTX 3060 <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/modder-turns-3060-8gb-into-12gb">8GB to 12GB mod</a> we covered recently from the same modder. The mod itself involved swapping the original six memory modules for six new modules with double the capacity, as well as editing the BIOS of the AMD card to support the new modules.<br><br>To replace the memory modules, Gomes used a heat gun to warm up the connection points between the memory ICs and the PCB, so the memory modules could be safely removed without damaging the components. Afterward, he prepped the PCB for the new 2GB modules with a special glue that will keep the modules in place and then installed the new modules on the card.</p><div class="youtube-video" data-nosnippet ><div class="video-aspect-box"><iframe data-lazy-priority="low" data-lazy-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/wMhQGXTsmJM" allowfullscreen></iframe></div></div><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2560px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="Upgrade poderoso_ Descubra o que fiz nessa RX 5600XT! 6-15 screenshot.png" alt="AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 6GB to 12GB mod" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QVjfeWZFQPMAC6gvgStoPh.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="2560" height="1440" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QVjfeWZFQPMAC6gvgStoPh.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: AMD)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Since the RX 5600 XT does not ship with a 12GB configuration, a BIOS mod is required for support. The modder used a hex editor to manipulate the proper values that will allow the BIOS to recognize the faster 2GB ICs, then flashed the BIOS to the card. BIOS modding is still possible with some AMD GPUs, though it&apos;s not something you can do on modern Nvidia GPUs.<br><br>The 5600 XT with the new modules exhibited a massive increase in performance, at least in specific tests. For example, the Unigine Superposition test Gomes used included a benchmark run at 10K resolution to fully saturate the 12GB memory config. The original 8GB config scored 191 points with this benchmarking configuration, while the modified card scored 412 points in the same config. Of course, most games won&apos;t see this same performance increase, but the extra VRAM could still be helpful in games that use more than 6GB of video memory — assuming the GPU itself isn&apos;t the bottleneck, which is becoming increasingly unlikely.<br><br>The implications of this mod are much more applicable to AMD GPUs since the BIOS can be modified in the way Gomes demonstrated. In theory, this allows all AMD Radeon graphics cards to be upgraded with more video memory since there are no editing restrictions on AMD BIOS&apos;s as far as we&apos;re aware. This is a far cry from modern Nvidia GPUs, which do not allow BIOS modding of any sort.<br><br>Of course, the tools and skill required to carry out this sort of mod are a different matter. Most of use can look on in appreciation, but if you want a card with 12GB or 24GB, it&apos;s going to be far easier to simply put your money into one of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">best graphics cards</a> rather than trying to upgrade a three years old RX 5600 XT.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ AMD's Mainstream RX 7000 GPUs to Arrive Before July ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amds-mainstream-rx-7000-gpus-to-arrive-before-july</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ AMD's mainstream RDNA 3-based graphics cards are incoming this quarter, according to AMD CEO Lisa Su. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">mNdeC6UxTZQTpNbnzXZUui</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4Un4dNztdVREebc7QZ95Zm-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 03 May 2023 16:17:50 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 10:05:06 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ ashilov@gmail.com (Anton Shilov) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Anton Shilov ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uMZ5kNphxA2Ut6whdLaSQV.png ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Anton Shilov has been in the PC industry since 1990s playing games, building PCs, and writing stories about pretty much everything that relates to PCs, Macs, smartphones, tablets, and even fab equipment. Over his career, he has worked at a variety of high-ranking websites, including AnandTech, EE Times, TechRadar, X-bit labs, and now Tom&#039;s Hardware. When Anton is not reading or writing about something high-tech, he is probably watching a good movie, playing a video game, or spending time with his family.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4Un4dNztdVREebc7QZ95Zm-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[AMD]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[AMD]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[AMD]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[AMD]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4Un4dNztdVREebc7QZ95Zm-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Lisa Su, chief executive of AMD, this week confirmed that the company is on track to release its mainstream graphics cards based on its <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-rdna-3-gpu-architecture-deep-dive-the-ryzen-moment-for-gpus">RDNA 3</a> architecture this quarter. Lisa did not specify which products AMD plans to launch, but it is reasonable to expect cheaper Radeon RX 7000-series products to hit the market in the next few months.<br><br>"We are on track to expand our RDNA 3 GPU portfolio with the launch of new mainstream Radeon RX 7000-series GPUs this quarter," Su <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-posts-first-loss-in-years-in-q1-2023">said</a> at the earnings conference call with analysts and investors.<br><br>AMD&apos;s high-end RDNA 3-based <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top">Radeon RX 7900 XTX and Radeon RX 7900 XT</a>, which belong to the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">best graphics cards</a> available today, have been on the market for over four months now. At $999 and $899, these boards look to be pretty competitive against competing offerings from Nvidia in numerous games, but they are quite expensive for average gamers. The 7900 XT price has also dropped to $799 of late, in part due to competition with Nvidia&apos;s RTX 4070 Ti. Regardless, while AMD may earn a lot per board sold, their volumes are not high.<br><br>Based on <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-maintains-lead-as-sales-of-graphics-cards-hit-all-time-low-in-2022-jpr">data from Jon Peddie Research</a>, AMD&apos;s share of the discrete graphics card market for desktops reached 11% in Q4 2022, an indicator that the company&apos;s high-volume GPUs were not particularly popular among graphics cards manufacturers and PC OEMs. By contrast, Nvidia dominated the market with an 84% share.<br><br>To perhaps grab some market share back, it&apos;s nearing time for AMD to release its Radeon RX 7600-, Radeon RX 7700-, and Radeon RX 7800-series graphics cards. These will invariably cost less than the premium Radeon RX 7900-series, and will hopefully offer higher performance than the company&apos;s RDNA 2-based Radeon RX 6000-series cards that are now over two years old.<br><br>The question is whether the upcoming mainstream RX 7000-series parts will offer a better value than the existing RX 6000-series GPUs. The <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6950-xt-review">RX 6950 XT</a> for example can now be picked up for just $599, and in non-ray tracing games it delivers performance roughly on par with the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-review-a-costly-70-class-gpu">RTX 4070 Ti</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3090-review">RTX 3090</a>, and not far below the RX 7900 XT. What will a mainstream RX 7600 XT offer, in terms of price and performance? That remains to be seen.<br><br>Interestingly, a newly discovered <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-lists-radeon-rx-7950-xtx-other-unreleased-rdna3-graphics-cards">AMD ROCm 5.6 pull request</a> contains a number of AMD&apos;s yet-unreleased graphics cards based on the company&apos;s Navi 31, Navi 32, and Navi 33 GPUs. These are designed for premium, high-end, performance mainstream, mainstream, and entry-level segments. If the model numbers are not placeholders for later use, we could see the Radeon RX 7800 XT, 7700 XT, 7600 XT, and 7500 XT for desktop computers as well as the Radeon RX 7600M XT, 7600M, 7700S, and 7600S for laptops in the coming months.<br><br>While Su confirmed plans to expand the company&apos;s RDNA 3-based portfolio shortly, she did not reveal when exactly the chip designer plans to start sales of the new Radeon RX 7000-series products. The company also did not provide any guidance regarding sales of its discrete GPU offerings in Q2, so it&apos;s unclear whether it expects to sell a lot of its mainstream RDNA 3-based offerings during the quarter.</p><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/XDf5PcNM.html" id="XDf5PcNM" title="How To Choose A Graphics Card" width="960" height="540" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Dead Island 2 Performance: AMD, Intel, and Nvidia Compared ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/news/dead-island-2-performance-amd-intel-and-nvidia-compared</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Dead Island 2 is here and we've tested it on a bunch of graphics cards to see what sort of settings and performance you can expect from your GPU. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">SRkn8iu58yFuXEt28oPaLV</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SqTHNpBLcxWE3t8Wo227sk-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 02 May 2023 14:49:28 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:43:36 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jarred Walton ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8uFgSGcCzKdFTTQdqonCPi.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jarred&#039;s love of computers dates back to the dark ages, when his dad brought home a DOS 2.3 PC and he left his C-64 behind. He eventually built his first custom PC in 1990 with a 286 12MHz, only to discover it was already woefully outdated when Wing Commander released a few months later. He holds a BS in Computer Science from Brigham Young University and has been working as a tech journalist since 2004, writing for AnandTech, Maximum PC, and PC Gamer. From the first S3 Virge &#039;3D decelerators&#039; to today&#039;s GPUs, Jarred keeps up with all the latest graphics trends and is the one to ask about game performance.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SqTHNpBLcxWE3t8Wo227sk-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Deep Silver]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Dead Island 2 screenshots]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Dead Island 2 screenshots]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Dead Island 2 screenshots]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SqTHNpBLcxWE3t8Wo227sk-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p><em>Dead Island 2</em> arrived on April 21, dropping you in the middle of "Hell-A" — a zombie apocalypse take on Hollywood and its surroundings. It&apos;s also an AMD-promoted game, with support for FSR 2, FidelityFX Super Resolution 2. That&apos;s AMD&apos;s upscaling algorithm that competes against DLSS, only without any special hardware requirements as it will work on just about any graphics card. We&apos;ve tested the game on many of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">best graphics cards</a> to see how it performs and what settings might be best on a variety of GPUs.<br><br>There are some caveats of course, like the AMD-promoted aspect. That usually means a game has been tuned more for AMD GPUs, and in this case it leaves out any form of ray tracing or support for the competing DLSS and XeSS upscalers. But at least all of the GPU companies have issued Game Ready drivers for <em>Dead Island 2</em>, so let&apos;s cover the settings and see how it runs.<br><br>Note that this is a companion piece of sorts to our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/redfall-gpu-benchmarks"><em>Redfall</em> PC benchmarks</a> article. That&apos;s an Nvidia-promoted game that also uses Unreal Engine 4, so we&apos;ve got a Team Red versus Team Green competition of sorts. And both games have received relatively lukewarm reviews so far, unfortunately.</p><h2 id="dead-island-2-settings">Dead Island 2 Settings</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LR3kwLyizD4rf3yD2aMBgF.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GCnVJwDWU2HqTGdiAm3doF.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TTNMsKnQpAgjV9pmHxzmxF.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ddSSNZ23ULNDAbouxuCU9G.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mXWXyE8iYPYa7oRQNj8YHG.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VWqPhm8pSVENrceyFJLTRG.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JomjNUYF4BGLvxJvL822ZG.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BbAdJtzwWEouMuNerctffG.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jU4s8ejNN4djWZjYzzCunG.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TkoPyUPn6VqayAwRxtoP7H.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p><em>Dead Island 2</em> uses Unreal Engine, and it has four graphics presets along with a custom option: Low, Medium, High, and Ultra. Flip to the custom option and you can see the various individual settings. Most people will be fine with the medium preset as a starting point, and the game tends to look pretty similar in most cases, regardless of settings. There&apos;s a loss in image fidelity with the low preset, with lower resolution textures and shadow maps, fewer particles, etc., but even then it doesn&apos;t look bad.<br><br>Moving up from medium, you get the usual diminishing returns. There are more shadows visible in some scenes on high, but ultra looks nearly indistinguishable from high. There&apos;s one thing to note, however, and it&apos;s that anti-aliasing (AA) isn&apos;t changed with the presets. We set it to "Temporal AA High" on all the screenshots, as otherwise jaggies can be quite visible and there&apos;s not that much of a performance impact on most GPUs.<br><br>The AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution 2 (FSR2) and AMD FidelityFX Variable Shading (VRS) are also unaffected by the presets, and for the above images, both were always turned off. You can get a slight performance boost with VRS, with a potential change in image quality, while FSR2 can provide larger performance gains but also causes a more noticeable loss in fidelity, especially at lower resolutions with higher upscaling factors.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CEhbRYThwCcojxruws3txE.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>Low preset<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5FW9PYbRhGsJnaQQjqcVAF.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>Medium preset<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mkUDcAKdhoJN9vcqqmgnMF.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>High preset<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rxt5oARXxEMZkAoWgzW9ZF.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>Ultra preset<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eRp25Yv8XqkSaqg5DpE6vB.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>Low preset<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JHvvJzYdkM72NKTXfQhYBC.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>Medium preset<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iNAc95G52YL7bstTNPrcJC.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>High preset<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QRZ8VukND4JS3GMJvaJERC.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>Ultra preset<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dnFtWPKyQkPDd3VNvbjGpC.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>Low preset<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RNCiyKJrUwcWaQy4AXqo5D.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>Medium preset<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Xnb7XmWfNF3ERumLBaifJD.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>High preset<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/d2WQFQNfytryi8pEJxQXTD.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>Ultra preset<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7iMU9JEZXpZcKdec2X7XcD.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>Low preset<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dfbN4ZhsgsQaVjPkbibYoD.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>Medium preset<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Rm8J9zbEAH3ZF2UDmbFE2E.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>High preset<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7qfYAgAkDGbDyTDokdeDCE.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>Ultra preset<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/midUe7CK2U83ZZvJgPhqLE.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>Low preset<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tfgDAgjLHc6Q9oq6iJBmVE.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>Medium preset<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bpPR4nCbaXJ3ystEVsSwdE.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>High preset<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nCkPaDNuJrttEgk5T4uinE.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>Ultra preset<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ytmSMgn9FsfcVwqYoBDQJH.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>RX 6500 XT ultra at 1080p<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HUyuTL3CWzP3YDrZseu4wG.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screen captures by Tom's Hardware" /><figcaption>RX 6500 XT ultra at 1440p (resized to 1080p)<small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>You can flip through the above gallery to see five different sets of images. However, due to the dynamic nature of a lot of effects (smoke, flickering lights, moving trees, etc.) there will be changes that aren&apos;t directly attributable to the quality preset. The first four images are perhaps the best indicator of the differences you&apos;ll see (or not) between the various presets.<br><br>That doesn&apos;t mean everyone should just use the ultra preset, however. The final two images in the gallery show what happens at 1440p compared to 1080p on the RX 6500 XT, a card with only 4GB of VRAM. The game runs out of graphics memory and ends up not loading a lot of textures, particularly on more distant objects. Dropping to medium fixes the issue, even at 1440p.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="Dead-Island-2-screenshot5.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screenshots" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RRWRAanUVa7J9LYQZncyDm.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1920" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RRWRAanUVa7J9LYQZncyDm.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Bethesda)</span></figcaption></figure><h2 id="dead-island-2-test-setup">Dead Island 2 Test Setup</h2><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">Test Hardware</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text"><strong>TOM&apos;S HARDWARE TEST PC</strong><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BCF54SR1">Intel Core i9-13900K</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BL8JC76Q">MSI MEG Z790 Ace DDR5</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09Z1SRR22">G.Skill Trident Z5 2x16GB DDR5-6600 CL34</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BJ1283X8">Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus-G 4TB</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08HGVZXLP">be quiet! 1500W Dark Power Pro 12</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BGR9213C">Cooler Master PL360 Flux</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-11-everything-you-need-to-know">Windows 11 Pro 64-bit</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/samsung-odyssey-neo-g8-review">Samsung Neo G8 32</a><br><br><strong>GRAPHICS CARDS</strong><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top">AMD RX 7900 XTX</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top">AMD RX 7900 XT</a><br>AMD RX 6000-Series<br><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a770-limited-edition-review">Intel Arc A770 16GB</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a750-limited-edition-review">Intel Arc A750</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a380-review">Intel Arc A380</a><br><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-review">Nvidia RTX 4090</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-review">Nvidia RTX 4080</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-review-a-costly-70-class-gpu">Nvidia RTX 4070 Ti</a><br><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-review">Nvidia RTX 4070</a><br>Nvidia RTX 30-Series</p></div></div><p>We&apos;re using our standard 2023 GPU test PC, with a Core i9-13900K and all the other bells and whistles. We&apos;ve tested 20 different GPUs from the past two generation of architectures in <em>Dead Island 2</em>, using the medium and ultra presets.<br><br>We&apos;re also testing at 1920x1080, 2560x1440, and 3840x2160, and we&apos;ve also tested most of the cards at 4K with FSR2 Quality upscaling enabled. Only the RX 6500 XT and Arc A380 weren&apos;t tested at 4K, due to a lack of performance.<br><br>Our test sequence consists of running a loop through one of the early maps. Each GPU gets one loop to "warm up," where we also kill any zombies in the area — they interfere with our benchmarking if they attack us. This is followed by two more loops while logging frametimes. We check the results to ensure consistency of performance, running additional loops if there&apos;s significant variability. That can happen when changing settings from medium to ultra, which means we toss the first 1080p ultra result as well.<br><br>Generally speaking, results were very repeatable, disregarding any mid-testing zombie slaying that may have been required. (Zombies respawn every few minutes, which can be quite annoying for testing purposes.) Updates to the game and/or drivers could change things in the future, but this is how performance looks about a week after launch.<br><br>Let&apos;s hit the charts.</p><h2 id="dead-island-2-gpu-performance">Dead Island 2 GPU Performance</h2><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.05%;"><img id="" name="ALLGPU-DeadIsland-1-1080p-Medium.png" alt="Dead Island 2 performance" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5JWkoD76X9ct82y3vcgN6k.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1441" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Our baseline testing at 1080p medium shows that every GPU in our test suite is definitely playable, with even the slowest Arc A380 still averaging over 60 fps. Minimums can dip into the 40 fps range, but in general there&apos;s not much to complain about for any relatively decent graphics card.<br><br>AMD&apos;s faster GPUs all hit a CPU bottleneck of around 303 fps, while Nvidia&apos;s GPUs max out at around 274 fps. 1% lows in both cases are around 170–175 fps, which should be sufficient for just about everyone. Those with 240 Hz (or higher) displays might be impacted, but those remain relatively niche gaming monitors.<br><br>About the only real item of note here is that Intel&apos;s Arc GPUs underperform a bit. In many games, the A770 and A750 can slightly exceed the performance of the RTX 3060, but they end up trailing by up to 15% in <em>Dead Island 2</em> at 1080p medium.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.05%;"><img id="" name="ALLGPU-DeadIsland-2-1080p-Ultra.png" alt="Dead Island 2 performance" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v5GKQpwex9qtQ6YnLPMVCk.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1441" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Bumping the quality up to ultra drops performance on everything, though the fastest Nvidia GPUs still  end up hitting a CPU limit of around 235 fps. Minimum fps also drops and lands at around 120–125 fps in most cases. AMD&apos;s fastest GPUs still take the top spots, thanks to their slightly higher CPU limits.<br><br>At the bottom of the charts, the RX 6500 XT and Arc A380 remain playable, but only just — and there&apos;s noticeable stuttering with the 4GB RX 6500 XT now. Given the lack of major improvements in image quality, you&apos;d be better off using a mix of medium and high settings on a 4GB card.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.05%;"><img id="" name="ALLGPU-DeadIsland-3-1440p-Ultra.png" alt="Dead Island 2 benchmarks" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dB2tM8a55BgJBWvXvB8PLk.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1441" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>1440p ultra continues to be at least partially CPU limited on the RTX 4090 and RTX 4080, though they now take the top two slots. Minimum fps doesn&apos;t change much compared to 1080p either, which is a good indicator that <em>Dead Island 2</em> still wants a decent amount of CPU power. If all you&apos;re aiming for is 60 fps, though, most processors of the past five years should prove sufficient (and some from even earlier as well).<br><br>The Arc A380 is the only GPU to fall below 30 fps in our collection of tested cards, but the RX 6500 XT remains marginal at these settings. If you want to keep minimums above 60 fps, generally speaking it looks like you&apos;ll need at least an RX 6750 XT (or 6700 XT), though the Arc A770 16GB gets there as well. From Nvidia, the RTX 3070 and above will suffice.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.05%;"><img id="" name="ALLGPU-DeadIsland-4-4K-Ultra.png" alt="Dead Island 2 benchmarks" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/b2iM4AAZbks745XER4iFUk.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1441" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Given what we&apos;ve seen already, it&apos;s not too surprising to see a lot of GPUs still above 60 fps, even at 4K ultra. Minimum fps can dip well below that mark, especially on cards with 8GB of VRAM (like the RTX 3070), but dropping to the high preset should help quite a bit.<br><br>The RTX 3050 and RX 6600 deliver marginally playable results, and we noticed that the mouse input felt rather sluggish once you near the 30 fps mark. Generally speaking, you&apos;ll want to stay above 40 fps to avoid the degraded responsiveness, meaning keep the 1% lows above 40 fps. That means only the RTX 4070 and RX 6800 XT and above will suffice for 4K ultra.<br><br>But there&apos;s another option for making 4K playable...</p><h2 id="dead-island-2-fsr2-quality-upscaling">Dead Island 2 FSR2 Quality Upscaling</h2><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:75.05%;"><img id="" name="ALLGPU-DeadIsland-5-4K-UltraUpscale.png" alt="Dead Island 2 benchmarks" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/H8won99ASVCUUJx67Npzbk.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1441" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>We tested at 4K using FSR2 with Quality mode upscaling, and that boosted performance by 20–30 percent for most GPUs. The only exceptions are the fastest cards, where Quality upscaling only delivered 10–15 percent higher framerates.<br><br>Of course you could opt for higher upscaling factors, with Performance mode generally delivering a similar experience to native 1080p (minus around 10% for the FSR2 overhead).<br><br>One interesting footnote here is that FSR2 seemed to want more VRAM at 4K than what we&apos;ve seen in the past. Cards with only 8GB tended to be a bit finnicky, with performance fluctuating more than we&apos;d like. Or perhaps it was just that the game doesn&apos;t feel particularly fluid and responsive below ~40 fps.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rZNixYVhShecgSLM8QXQxk.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screenshots" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aLMUcuHFi4uXTFLs4Bftjk.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screenshots" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/womDePkaoa2bBSuq3osZ5m.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screenshots" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SqTHNpBLcxWE3t8Wo227sk.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screenshots" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RRWRAanUVa7J9LYQZncyDm.jpg" alt="Dead Island 2 screenshots" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Bethesda</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="dead-island-2-closing-thoughts">Dead Island 2 Closing Thoughts</h2><p>It&apos;s a nice change of pace to be able to play a game on just about any reasonable GPU without having to tweak settings to get a good experience. Older GPUs might struggle a bit, but considering how weak the RX 6500 XT and Arc A380 are in our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html">GPU benchmarks hierarchy</a>, just about anyone with even a modest gaming PC should be able to run the game fine.<br><br>The game itself can be fun, as far as zombie apocalypses are concerned, but it&apos;s pretty generic feeling. All the core concepts are present, with various places to explore, but nothing exceptional — our sister site <a href="https://www.pcgamer.com/dead-island-2-review/" target="_blank">PC Gamer scored it a 55</a>, for reference. The combat is easy enough when there&apos;s a single zombie, but things get quite a bit more hectic when you&apos;re fighting off half a dozen or more at the same time, and there are also "boss" (aka sponge) enemies that just require more time to take them down.<br><br>One pretty serious complaint is that the items and zombies all scale to your level, so you never end up feeling truly powerful. That keeps the challenge present, even when you return to the starting area, but it also means even the best loot and skills don&apos;t seem to matter much. And then all of that goes out the window once you get access to guns and move beyond the melee combat.<br><br>At that point, you can pick off zombies from a distance and never really feel threatened. So yeah, you feel more powerful... but the game quickly becomes boring. It&apos;s not an open world game either, not as such. There are about ten maps, each is relatively large, and you transition between them during the campaign. It feels a bit more like a faux-open world game.</p><div class="youtube-video" data-nosnippet ><div class="video-aspect-box"><iframe data-lazy-priority="low" data-lazy-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/lZqrG1bdGtg" allowfullscreen></iframe></div></div><p>Graphically, the game looks good, but it also looks and feels pretty generic. The ambient occlusion for example can pop in at the set distance in ways that look fake. In other words, you shouldn&apos;t expect visuals that rival <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/cyberpunk-2077-rt-overdrive-path-tracing-full-path-tracing-fully-unnecessary">Cyberpunk 2077 with RT Overdrive</a>. There&apos;s also no dynamic time of day or weather. You enter a level at a set time, and it stays there. Progress through the story and come back and it might be nighttime instead of daytime, but just sitting around won&apos;t ever show lengthening shadows or a true day/night cycle.<br><br>Overall, then, <em>Dead Island 2</em> is a lot like its predecessor. Oh, except it&apos;s no longer on an "island," unless you think of LA as more of a philosophical island I guess. It&apos;s also missing the (at the time) epic launch trailer of the original, which 12 years later is the main thing I remember about the original game. But hey, at least you won&apos;t need an uber-PC to run it!</p><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/XDf5PcNM.html" id="XDf5PcNM" title="How To Choose A Graphics Card" width="960" height="540" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe><ul><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html"><strong>Best Graphics Cards</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html"><strong>GPU Benchmarks and Hierarchy</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/graphics"><strong>All Graphics Content</strong></a></li></ul>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
            </channel>
</rss>