OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

ASRock Radeon RX 9070 Challenger review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£480VRAM:16 GBMemory bus width:256 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):220 W

ASRock Radeon RX 9070 Challenger Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 1 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

ASRock Radeon RX 9070 Challenger
8.0/10

Overall score

Score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 72% of models
Score components

40%

8.2

Technical score

25%

7.6

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

10

Sentiment score

▲Better than 72% of graphics cards
8.0

Value for money

Value for money
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 97% of models
Score components

70%

8.0

Overall score

30%

8.0

Price

★Better than 97%
8.2

Technical score

Technical score
8.2/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 72% of models
Score components

44%

7.5

Performance

24%

8.5

Memory

12%

8.4

Power

11%

9.3

Features

5%

7.8

Design

4%

9.9

Connectivity

▲Better than 72%
7.6

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.6/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 61% of models

80%

8.2

Average grade

20%

5.0

Popularity

Grades by review (1)
1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▼Worse than 61%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • asrock-radeon-rx-9070-challenger
asrock-radeon-rx-9070-challenger
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card ASRock Radeon RX 9070 Challenger

Technical score
Technical score
8.2/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 72% of models
Score components:

44%

7.5

Performance

24%

8.5

Memory

12%

8.4

Power

11%

9.3

Features

5%

7.8

Design

4%

9.9

Connectivity

8.2
Reviews score
7.6
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 97% of models
Score components:

70%

8.0

Overall score

30%

8.0

Price

8.0
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
27,000 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 27,000 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is higher than 81.2% of graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
16,229 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 16,229 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is higher than 76.4% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
25,386 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 25,386 points in PassMark G3D, which is higher than 58.3% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
14,798 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 14,798 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is higher than 60% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
36.1 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 36.1 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is higher than that of 68.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
16 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 16 GB of VRAM, which is more than 62% of graphics cards and equal to 28.1% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6
This graphics card uses GDDR6 memory, which is newer than on 16.4% of graphics cards and equal to 40.3% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
256 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 256 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 50.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 35.5% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
640 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 640 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is higher than that of 66.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.9% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
20,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 20,000 MHz, which is faster than that of 53.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 7.5% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
5
This graphics card supports PCIe 5, which is newer than on 73% of graphics cards and equal to 27% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 24.1% of graphics cards and equal to 75.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12 Ultimate
This graphics card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which is more advanced than on 22.8% of graphics cards and equal to 77.2% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.8% of graphics cards and equal to 79.2% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 9% of graphics cards and equal to 88.2% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 90.9% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
3
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 3 DisplayPort outputs, which is more than 21.7% of graphics cards and equal to 76% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
2.1a
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 2.1a, which is more advanced than on 74.2% of graphics cards and equal to 3.6% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
80 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 80 Gbps, which is faster than on 84.9% of graphics cards and equal to 14.9% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
220 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 220 W, which is higher than that of 50.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.2% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
330 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 330 W under peak load, which is higher than 82.2% of graphics cards and equal to 0.5% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
700 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 700 W PSU, which is higher than that of 60.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.6% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
245 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 245 W, which is higher than that of 54.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.6% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
220 W
Show more
Size
290x 123x 51 mm
Length
290 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 290 mm long, which is longer than 52.4% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.8% of graphics cards.
Height
51 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 51 mm tall, which is shorter than 96.3% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2.5 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s, which is slimmer than 35.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 14.7% of graphics cards.
Weight
918 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 918 g, which is lighter than 61.6% of Graphics cards.
Show more

ASRock Radeon RX 9070 Challenger vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 64 more ROPs
    This graphics card has more ROPs than the average graphics card (128 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    128 vs 64
  • 2x higher pixel rate
    This graphics card has a higher pixel rate than the average graphics card (322.6 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    322.6 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 4 GB more VRAM
    This graphics card has more VRAM than the average graphics card (16 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    16 GB vs 12 GB
  • 64 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (256 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    256 bit vs 192 bit
  • 43.9% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2,518 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    2,518 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 42.9% higher memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (640 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    640 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 16 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (56 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    56 vs 40
  • Newer PCIe version
    This graphics card supports a newer PCIe version than the average graphics card (5 vs 4).
    5 vs 4
  • 28.2% higher sentiment score
    10.0 vs 7.8
  • 8.2% better value for money
    ASRock Radeon RX 9070 Challenger has better value for money than the average graphics card (8.02 vs 7.4).
    8.02 vs 7.41
  • 5.6% higher review score
    Reviews score
    7.6/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▼ Worse than 61% of models

    80%

    8.2

    Average grade

    20%

    5.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (1)
    1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    7.6 vs 7.2
  • 64 more ROPs
    This graphics card has more ROPs than the average graphics card (128 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    128 vs 64
  • 2x higher pixel rate
    This graphics card has a higher pixel rate than the average graphics card (322.6 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    322.6 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 16 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (56 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    56 vs 40
  • 49.3% higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (564.5 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    564.5 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 16 more ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has more ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (56 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    56 vs 40
  • 59.7% higher FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP32 performance than the average graphics card (36.1 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    36.1 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 82.7% higher gaming score
    This graphics card has a higher gaming score than the average graphics card (27,000 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    27,000 points vs 14,779 points
  • 40 more TMUs
    This graphics card has more TMUs than the average graphics card (224 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    224 vs 184
  • 2 years newer
    This graphics card was released more recently than the average graphics card (2025 vs 2023).
    March 2025
    2025 vs 2023
  • 77.4% higher ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a higher ray tracing score than the average graphics card (16,229 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    16,229 points vs 9,148 points
  • 2.35x higher FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP64 performance than the average graphics card (1.1 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    1.13 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 2.45x higher FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP16 performance than the average graphics card (72.3 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    72.3 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 4 GB more VRAM
    This graphics card has more VRAM than the average graphics card (16 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    16 GB vs 12 GB
  • 64 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (256 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    256 bit vs 192 bit
  • 43.9% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2,518 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    2,518 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 42.9% higher memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (640 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    640 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 16x more Infinity Cache
    This graphics card has more Infinity Cache than the average graphics card (64 MB vs 4 MB). The average graphics card has 4 MB Infinity Cache.
    64 MB vs 4 MB
  • Newer PCIe version
    This graphics card supports a newer PCIe version than the average graphics card (5 vs 4).
    5 vs 4
  • 2.35x more transistors
    This graphics card has more transistors than the average graphics card (53,900 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    53,900 million vs 22,900 million
  • Newer DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports a newer DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (2.1a vs 1.4a).
    2.1a vs 1.4a
  • Newer HDMI version
    This graphics card supports a newer HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.1b vs 2.1a).
    2.1b vs 2.1a
  • 3.7x higher DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (80 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    80 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps
  • 12.9 dB quieter under load
    This graphics card has a lower load noise level than the average graphics card (22.5 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    22.5 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 7 °C lower load temperature
    This graphics card has a lower load temperature than the average graphics card (60 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    60 °C vs 67 °C
  • 74 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (51 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    51 mm vs 125 mm
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 30.7% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,330 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,330 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (frame generation vs multi frame generation).
    frame generation vs multi frame generation
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • 32 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (112 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    112 vs 144
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 30.7% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,330 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,330 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 32 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (112 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    112 vs 144
  • 66.7% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (8 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    8 MB vs 24 MB
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (frame generation vs multi frame generation).
    frame generation vs multi frame generation
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • Older OpenCL version
    This graphics card supports an older OpenCL version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 3).
    2.2 vs 3
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • 15 °C lower thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a lower thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (110 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    110 °C vs 95 °C
  • 7.7% higher PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a higher PSU requirement than the average graphics card (700 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    700 W vs 650 W
  • 8 °C higher idle temperature
    This graphics card has a higher idle temperature than the average graphics card (45 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    45 °C vs 37 °C
  • 50% higher peak power draw
    This graphics card has a higher peak power draw than the average graphics card (330 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    330 W vs 220 W
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

9.0
MZRIGS
≈ estimated
12/08/2025
Hands-on review · temperatures, 3DMark and game tests
Verdict
ASRock Radeon RX 9070 Challenger is a very good card, running cool and playing smoothly, though 4K was not tested.
Shop video
Overview video
Overview video
Not graded

Third-party reviews

What customers like about ASRock Radeon RX 9070 Challenger

  • Excellent value for 1440p and 4K gaming
  • Efficient thermal performance with hotspot temperatures often staying around 70-75°C
  • Low power consumption, especially when undervolted (some users report under 100W-240W depending on load)
  • Quiet operation with '0dB Silent Cooling' technology that stops fans during low loads
  • Solid build quality featuring a stylish metal backplate for durability
  • Substantial 16GB VRAM is well-suited for modern high-resolution titles

What customers don't like about ASRock Radeon RX 9070 Challenger

  • RGB lighting strip is not addressable and colors cannot be customized (only has an on/off switch)
  • Build feel is described as being on the 'cheaper side' to maintain its budget price point
  • Initial pricing in some regions was reported as significantly higher than the MSRP
  • Limited aesthetic customization compared to higher-tier models like the Steel Legend

Verdict

The ASRock Radeon RX 9070 Challenger 16GB is a performance-oriented graphics card built on AMD's RDNA 4 architecture, featuring 3,584 stream processors, 56 Ray Accelerators, and 16GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with a 20 Gbps speed. It operates with a game clock of 2,070 MHz and a boost clock up to 2,520 MHz, supported by a triple-fan cooling system with Striped Axial Fans, ultra-fit heatpipes, and 0dB silent cooling technology for efficient heat dissipation at a 220W TDP. Key advantages include exceptional 1440p gaming performance, a sturdy metal backplate for structural rigidity, and modern connectivity with DisplayPort 2.1a and HDMI 2.1b; however, users have noted that the side LED lighting is a single non-adjustable color and some units may exhibit audible coil whine under heavy loads.

Compare ASRock Radeon RX 9070 Challenger with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of ASRock Radeon RX 9070 Challenger and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found