AMD's RX 7900 XT Is the Second-Best Selling GPU on Amazon, at 17% Off

News
By Aaron Klotz
published

AMD's high-end RDNA3 GPU steals the show in the high-end GPU market

XFX Speedster MERC310 AMD Radeon RX 7900XT
(Image credit: XFX)

AMD's RX 7900 XT is gaining traction in the GPU market and has now become the second-best-selling graphics card on Amazon, thanks to a 17% discount below MSRP at the time of this writing. This makes AMD's 7900 XT one of the best bargains in the high-end GPU market, as well as one of the Best GPUs in general, with superior value to Nvidia's RTX 4070 Ti.

The specific model in question is the XFX RX 7900 XT Speedster MERC310, which is being sold for $787. At this price, the 7900 XT undercuts the RTX 4070 Ti by $12, while outperforming it by 9% in rasterized games. It also features 8GB more video memory with a total of 20GB compared to just 12 on the 4070 Ti. This will be important for driving AAA titles at maximum settings and resolutions for years to come.

The card itself is a massive triple-fan, triple slot graphics card, with a length of 13.5 inches. The shroud is painted in a stealthy matte black finish, with silver accents. Clock speeds range from 1775MHz base to a maximum boost frequency of 2535MHz. The card also features two PCIe 8-pin supplementary power connectors, with XFX recommending a 750W PSU at a minimum to run this card.

XFX Speedster MERC310 AMD Radeon RX 7900XT: now $787 at Amazon

XFX Speedster MERC310 AMD Radeon RX 7900XT: now $787 at Amazon (was $949)
Thanks to a 17% off sale, this is one of the best-selling graphics cards on Amazon right now. Grab one if you're after a high-end GPU deal, because it won't last long at this price.

View Deal

With this killer deal, it's not surprising that AMD is getting a lot of sales with its RX 7900 XT. Nvidia's high prices for its RTX 40 series graphics cards, paired with the underwhelming memory configuration of the 12GB RTX 4070 series, is not an inspiring combination for gamers. The rather low memory capacity is especially concerning since 12GB is the minimum requirement to drive 4K gaming at ultra settings on new 2023 titles, including Resident Evil 4 and The Last of Us Part 1.

To re-iterate, the 7900 XT's performance is excellent for rasterized games, with a 9% lead over the RTX 4070 Ti at 1440P. This sandwiches the 7900 XT's performance in between the RTX 4070 Ti and the much more expensive GeForce RTX 4080, while being cheaper than both those competitors. The only exception to this rule is in RT performance, where the RTX 4070 unsurprisingly yields an 18% lead due to its superior ray tracing hardware. Nvidia also has an advantage in DLSS support, with far more games supporting the super sampling tech compared to AMD's FSR counterpart.

But if Nvidia's fancy tech isn't your cup of tea, or you just don't mind making some sacrifices for superior value, AMD's RX 7900 XT is a killer deal that's hard to pass up for high-refresh esports, native 1440P, and 4K gaming.

Aaron Klotz
Aaron Klotz
Freelance News Writer

Aaron Klotz is a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware US, covering news topics related to computer hardware such as CPUs, and graphics cards.

See more GPUs News
12 Comments Comment from the forums
  • -Fran-
    On the subject of RT, if the 3070 is any indication, 12GB won't really cut it in about 3 years from now if Devs will target 4K resolutions for all textures and poly-complexity.

    Remember that it's not just the textures that reside in memory, but a plethora of other things. And RT just doubles down on the complexity side of texture mapping and its constructs.

    Well, time will tell, but I'd say it's a safer bet getting the 7900 siblings, the 6800 siblings or the 4090 at the top for full eye candy in the years to come.

    Regards.
    Reply
  • healthy Pro-teen
    -Fran- said:
    On the subject of RT, if the 3070 is any indication, 12GB won't really cut it in about 3 years from now if Devs will target 4K resolutions for all textures and poly-complexity.

    Remember that it's not just the textures that reside in memory, but a plethora of other things. And RT just doubles down on the complexity side of texture mapping and its constructs.

    Well, time will tell, but I'd say it's a safer bet getting the 7900 siblings, the 6800 siblings or the 4090 at the top for full eye candy in the years to come.

    Regards.
    The previous 3070Ti 8GB was the worst value for VRAM by far, the same case with the 4070Ti, 4080 is a joke and 7900XTX is...OK at $1K , because of the Huge VRAM and price/performance, though RT might matter a lot for buyers at this range. For me, it is the best card ever, I managed to get one for $900 (used, someone sold me on OLX saying they were buying a 4090) , I wanted a sapphire but this Aorus Elite turned out to be a beast at UV, 1030mV and it's a silent monster now. 7900XT, like the 6900XT have meh MSRP but in practice they were not bad at all. 6900XT was the same price as the 6800XT for quite a while in my local area during crypto boom. Wonder why the 4070Ti isn't dropping, Nvidia perhaps gives AIBs very slim margins so they cannot afford to drop prices, they'll be forced to either way though to move stock.
    Reply
  • SSGBryan
    My next card will be an A770 - 16gb of ram, active driver development, and a $349 cost means I'll be set for 1440p gaming until battlemage releases.
    Reply
  • Elusive Ruse
    Make it $700 and we got us a deal.
    Reply
  • oofdragon
    Bro you got a 7900XTX for $900 😭😭 That's just too good. IMO it's the best card on market right now, even at around $1000
    Reply
  • tstng
    While I own this card, and performance is superb, i do not recommend it. The fans are loud AF. They seem to have fitted the least efficient fans in existence. If you spin the fans up past 35%, good luck explaining it to the neighbors. I've had loud GPUs before, but this one takes the cake.
    Reply
  • borris618
    tstng said:
    While I own this card, and performance is superb, i do not recommend it. The fans are loud AF. They seem to have fitted the least efficient fans in existence. If you spin the fans up past 35%, good luck explaining it to the neighbors. I've had loud GPUs before, but this one takes the cake.
    Yea I agree, also the coilwhile is immense.

    Performance tho is very nice!
    Reply
  • KyaraM
    -Fran- said:
    On the subject of RT, if the 3070 is any indication, 12GB won't really cut it in about 3 years from now if Devs will target 4K resolutions for all textures and poly-complexity.

    Remember that it's not just the textures that reside in memory, but a plethora of other things. And RT just doubles down on the complexity side of texture mapping and its constructs.

    Well, time will tell, but I'd say it's a safer bet getting the 7900 siblings, the 6800 siblings or the 4090 at the top for full eye candy in the years to come.

    Regards.
    Fun fact, most people don't give a hoot about 4k, and the 4070Ti is advertised for 1440p anyways. And I have yet to find a game that isn't playing on a 4070Ti, and I'm 100% sure it will be that way a quite a while... plus, a 6800XT can't really do RT even today, (no, that sorry excuse it produces does not count) and RT is literally the worst thing hogging VRAM.
    Reply
  • Elusive Ruse
    Man if I had bought a 4070Ti for ~$900 I'd be so salty right now.
    Reply
  • -Fran-
    KyaraM said:
    Fun fact, most people don't give a hoot about 4k, and the 4070Ti is advertised for 1440p anyways. And I have yet to find a game that isn't playing on a 4070Ti, and I'm 100% sure it will be that way a quite a while... plus, a 6800XT can't really do RT even today, (no, that sorry excuse it produces does not count) and RT is literally the worst thing hogging VRAM.
    I half agree, as I personally don't find 4K something I'd want for myself. I'm a 1440p preacher, hehe.

    That being said, I do own a VR headset and I'm planning on getting whatever Valve releases next, so I'll be needing the extra VRAM for sure when that happens and, additionally to VR, think about it from Publishers and Developers targeting consoles: they have plenty shared memory that they don't need to "dual pool" (in the console) and this is important to understand as there's a lot of nuance in there which translates roughly to, at worst, having to duplicate all that memory pool in PC ports on both VRAM and RAM so your game can just load. This is not even taking into account resolution; it's just game core elements you put in memory. So, what I'm trying to get at here is: once they get it running on, say, the PS5 using 100% of it (memory, CPU, etc) the PC port will definitely will use 2X of the PS5 resources if history serves as guide.

    I've been listening to a lot of podcasts with game developers and they're all pretty darn vocal about not just wanting more RAM all around (system and GPU), but needing more because the consoles just set the floor for the next gen of games, whether we like it or not as PC enthusiasts. The fact they "target" 4K is just a baseline for complexity and graphical fidelity on screen as a baseline, which also includes textures, which is what is the easiest thing to translate to memory usage, but there's a lot more than just textures stored in VRAM; way more.

    Regards.
    Reply