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

ASUS Radeon RX 7900 XTX review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£1,130VRAM:24 GBMemory bus width:384 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):355 W

ASUS Radeon RX 7900 XTX Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 3 expert reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

ASUS Radeon RX 7900 XTX
8.3/10

Overall score

Score
8.3/ 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 83% of models
Score components

40%

9.0

Technical score

25%

7.7

Reviews score

25%

?

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

10%

8.5

Sentiment score

▲Better than 83% of graphics cards
7.1

Value for money

Value for money
7.1/ 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
▼ Worse than 71% of models
Score components

70%

8.3

Overall score

30%

4.5

Price

▼Worse than 71%
9.0

Technical score

Technical score
9.0/ 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 83% of models
Score components

44%

9.4

Performance

24%

9.2

Memory

12%

7.6

Power

11%

9.3

Features

5%

6.6

Design

4%

9.7

Connectivity

▲Better than 83%
7.7

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.7/ 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 56% of models

80%

7.8

Average grade

20%

7.4

Popularity

Grades by review (3)
3 reviews: 0 with a printed score, 3 estimated from the review. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▼Worse than 56%
?

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
  • asus-radeon-rx-7900-xtx
  • asus-radeon-rx-7900-xtx
  • asus-radeon-rx-7900-xtx
  • asus-radeon-rx-7900-xtx
  • asus-radeon-rx-7900-xtx
  • asus-radeon-rx-7900-xtx
  • asus-radeon-rx-7900-xtx
asus-radeon-rx-7900-xtx
asus-radeon-rx-7900-xtx
asus-radeon-rx-7900-xtx
asus-radeon-rx-7900-xtx
asus-radeon-rx-7900-xtx
asus-radeon-rx-7900-xtx
asus-radeon-rx-7900-xtx
Where to buy
    N/A~ £1,130
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the ASUS Radeon RX 7900 XTX

Based on 3

Reviewers praise its strong gaming performance, manageable size and cool running, but agree ray tracing lags behind.
Praised
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the ASUS Radeon RX 7900 XTX

Based on 281 owners sharing their experience in online comments

73%positive15%mixed12%negative

Owners praise fast high-resolution gaming and ample memory, while power draw, heat, and weaker ray tracing cause complaints.

What owners dislike

  • Some owners report driver crashes, DirectX 12 errors, and screen corruption, and found older driver versions more stable.5
  • Some cards hit 110°C and throttle right away, and high GPU hotspot temperatures sometimes needed the thermal paste reapplied.3
  • Ray tracing costs a lot of frame rate, with some owners seeing drops from 120 fps to 20 to 30 fps in Diablo 4 on medium RT.3
  • Under load the card often pulls 350 to 465 watts, with spikes near 600 watts, so owners may need a 1000-watt power supply.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card ASUS Radeon RX 7900 XTX

Technical score
Technical score
9.0/ 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 83% of models
Score components:

44%

9.4

Performance

24%

9.2

Memory

12%

7.6

Power

11%

9.3

Features

5%

6.6

Design

4%

9.7

Connectivity

9.0
Reviews score
7.7
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.1/ 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
▼ Worse than 71% of models
Score components:

70%

8.3

Overall score

30%

4.5

Price

7.1
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
30,000 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 30,000 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is higher than 89.1% of graphics cards and equal to 0.6% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
19,098 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 19,098 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is higher than 85.1% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
31,297 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 31,297 points in PassMark G3D, which is higher than 74.2% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
17,725 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 17,725 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is higher than 68.2% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
61.44 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 61.44 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is higher than that of 93.6% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
VRAM
24 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 24 GB of VRAM, which is more than 91.2% of graphics cards and equal to 5.5% 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
384 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 384 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 89.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
960 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 960 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is higher than that of 88.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 5.7% 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
4
This graphics card supports PCIe 4, which is newer than on 22.5% of graphics cards and equal to 50.5% 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
1.3
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.3, which is older than on 79.2% of graphics cards and equal to 15.6% 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
What reviewers say
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
2.1
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 2.1, which is more advanced than on 66.4% of graphics cards and equal to 7.7% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
20 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 20 Gbps, which is slower than on 50.4% of graphics cards and equal to 7.2% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
355 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 355 W, which is higher than that of 87.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.1% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
355 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 355 W under peak load, which is higher than 85.3% of graphics cards and equal to 0.4% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
800 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 800 W PSU, which is higher than that of 82.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.3% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
430 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 430 W, which is higher than that of 92.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.3% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
355 W
Show more
What reviewers say
Size
352.9x 158.2x 72.6 mm
Length
353 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 353 mm long, which is longer than 96.1% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.2% of graphics cards.
Height
123.2 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 123.2 mm tall, which is shorter than 54.4% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.5% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2.56 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2.56 slot/s, which is wider than 64.9% of graphics cards and equal in width to 0.5% of graphics cards.
Weight
1,857 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 1,857 g, which is heavier than 85.6% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of Graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say

ASUS Radeon RX 7900 XTX vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 56 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (96 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    96 vs 40
  • 56 more ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has more ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (96 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    96 vs 40
  • 128 more ROPs
    This graphics card has more ROPs than the average graphics card (192 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    192 vs 64
  • 12 GB more VRAM
    This graphics card has more VRAM than the average graphics card (24 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    24 GB vs 12 GB
  • 2.14x higher memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (960 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    960 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 192 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (384 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    384 bit vs 192 bit
  • 2.54x higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (959.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    959.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 200 more TMUs
    This graphics card has more TMUs than the average graphics card (384 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    384 vs 184
  • 6.9% higher review score
    Reviews score
    7.7/ 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 56% of models

    80%

    7.8

    Average grade

    20%

    7.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (3)
    3 reviews: 0 with a printed score, 3 estimated from the review. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    7.7 vs 7.2
  • 56 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (96 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    96 vs 40
  • 56 more ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has more ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (96 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    96 vs 40
  • 128 more ROPs
    This graphics card has more ROPs than the average graphics card (192 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    192 vs 64
  • 2.54x higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (959.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    959.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 200 more TMUs
    This graphics card has more TMUs than the average graphics card (384 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    384 vs 184
  • 2.97x higher pixel rate
    This graphics card has a higher pixel rate than the average graphics card (479.6 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    479.6 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 4.4% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,615 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,615 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 2.72x higher FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP32 performance than the average graphics card (61.4 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    61.44 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 2.03x higher gaming score
    This graphics card has a higher gaming score than the average graphics card (30,000 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    30,000 points vs 14,779 points
  • 2.09x higher ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a higher ray tracing score than the average graphics card (19,098 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    19,098 points vs 9,148 points
  • 38.2% higher PassMark score
    This graphics card has a higher PassMark score than the average graphics card (31,297 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    31,297 points vs 22,638 points
  • 48 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (192 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    192 vs 144
  • 4x higher FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP64 performance than the average graphics card (1.9 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    1.92 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 4.17x higher FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP16 performance than the average graphics card (123 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    123 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 7,936 more FP32 units
    This graphics card has more FP32 units than the average graphics card (12,288 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    12,288 vs 4,352
  • 3.46x higher BF16 performance
    This graphics card has a higher BF16 performance than the average graphics card (122.8 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has BF16 performance of 35.48 TFLOPS.
    122.8 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS
  • 12 GB more VRAM
    This graphics card has more VRAM than the average graphics card (24 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    24 GB vs 12 GB
  • 2.14x higher memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (960 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    960 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 192 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (384 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    384 bit vs 192 bit
  • 42.9% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2,500 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    2,500 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 24x more Infinity Cache
    This graphics card has more Infinity Cache than the average graphics card (96 MB vs 4 MB). The average graphics card has 4 MB Infinity Cache.
    96 MB vs 4 MB
  • 2.52x more transistors
    This graphics card has more transistors than the average graphics card (57,700 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    57,700 million vs 22,900 million
  • Newer DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports a newer DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (2.1 vs 1.4a).
    2.1 vs 1.4a
  • 10 °C lower load temperature
    This graphics card has a lower load temperature than the average graphics card (57 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    57 °C vs 67 °C
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • 65.1% higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (355 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    355 W vs 215 W
  • 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
  • 70.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (353 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    353 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 95.5% higher board power limit
    This graphics card has a higher board power limit than the average graphics card (430 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    430 W vs 220 W
  • 23.1% higher PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a higher PSU requirement than the average graphics card (800 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    800 W vs 650 W
  • Older Vulkan version
    This graphics card supports an older Vulkan version than the average graphics card (1.3 vs 1.4).
    1.3 vs 1.4
  • 2.17x more expensive
    ASUS Radeon RX 7900 XTX is more expensive than the average graphics card (£1,130 vs £520).
    £1,130 vs £520
  • 3.8% worse value for money
    ASUS Radeon RX 7900 XTX has worse value for money than the average graphics card (7.14 vs 7.4).
    7.14 vs 7.41
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 1 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2022 vs 2023).
    December 2022
    2022 vs 2023
  • 75% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (6 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    6 MB vs 24 MB
  • 75% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (32 KB vs 128 KB). The average graphics card has 128 KB L1 cache.
    32 KB vs 128 KB
  • 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
  • Older Vulkan version
    This graphics card supports an older Vulkan version than the average graphics card (1.3 vs 1.4).
    1.3 vs 1.4
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.7 vs 6.8).
    6.7 vs 6.8
  • 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
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265/AV1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265/AV1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • 65.1% higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (355 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    355 W vs 215 W
  • 23.1% higher PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a higher PSU requirement than the average graphics card (800 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    800 W vs 650 W
  • 95.5% higher board power limit
    This graphics card has a higher board power limit than the average graphics card (430 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    430 W vs 220 W
  • 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
  • 14.5 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (49.9 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    49.9 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 61.4% higher peak power draw
    This graphics card has a higher peak power draw than the average graphics card (355 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    355 W vs 220 W
  • 33.3% higher idle power draw
    This graphics card has a higher idle power draw than the average graphics card (16 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    16 W vs 12 W
  • 70.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (353 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    353 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 83.1% heavier
    This graphics card is heavier than the average graphics card (1,857 g vs 1,014 g). The average graphics card weighs 1,014 g.
    1,857 g vs 1,014 g

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

7.0
en.gamegpu.com
≈ estimated
26/12/2022
Benchmark test · Game performance
Verdict
ASUS Radeon RX 7900 XTX is a compact, cool card that matches the RTX 4080 with ray tracing off but falls to RTX 3080 Ti level with it on.
8.0
rockpapershotgun.com
≈ estimated
12/12/2022
Reference card review · 4K gaming
Verdict
Radeon RX 7900 XTX is a compact, cool 4K card that often beats the RTX 4080 without ray tracing but falls behind Nvidia once ray tracing is on.
7.0
es.gamegpu.com
≈ estimated
26/12/2022
Lab test · Top-end card
Verdict
ASUS Radeon RX 7900 XTX matches the RTX 4080 with ray tracing off and fits most cases, but it lags in ray tracing and draws a lot of power.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about ASUS Radeon RX 7900 XTX

  • Exceptional 4K gaming performance, often on par with the RTX 4080 in rasterization.
  • Outstanding build quality featuring a sturdy metal chassis and durable TUF components.
  • Highly efficient cooling system that maintains low temperatures, often staying below 60°C.
  • Quiet operation even under heavy load, with fans that remain inaudible during many gaming sessions.
  • Massive 24GB VRAM provides significant overhead for future AAA titles and creative workloads.
  • Generous connectivity with three DisplayPort 2.1 ports and HDMI 2.1 support.
  • Competitive price-to-performance ratio compared to high-end NVIDIA alternatives.

What customers don't like about ASUS Radeon RX 7900 XTX

  • Enormous physical size (3.63 to 4-slot design) that may not fit in many standard mid-tower cases.
  • High power consumption, especially in OC mode, requiring at least an 850W power supply.
  • Ray-tracing performance and upscaling (FSR) still trail behind NVIDIA's DLSS and hardware capabilities.
  • Inconsistent power draw issues reported, such as spikes during idle periods.
  • AMD software and drivers occasionally require extra tweaking for stability compared to competitors.

Verdict

The Asus Radeon RX 7900 XTX is a high-end graphics card built on AMD's RDNA 3 chiplet architecture, featuring 24GB of GDDR6 memory, a 384-bit interface, and 6144 stream processors. The TUF Gaming OC variant offers a boost clock of up to 2615 MHz and a 3.63-slot cooling system equipped with triple Axial-tech fans to ensure low temperatures and quiet operation. Key pros include exceptional 4K gaming and rasterisation performance that competes with the RTX 4080, massive VRAM for future-proofing, and support for DisplayPort 2.1. However, it suffers from higher power consumption (requiring an 850W+ PSU), a very large physical footprint that may not fit in all cases, and ray-tracing performance that still trails behind its Nvidia competitors.

Compare ASUS Radeon RX 7900 XTX 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 ASUS Radeon RX 7900 XTX and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found