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

Sapphire NITRO+ Radeon RX 9070 Gaming OC 16GB review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£720VRAM:16 GBMemory bus width:256 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):220 W

Sapphire NITRO+ Radeon RX 9070 Gaming OC 16GB Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 1 best-of list to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

Sapphire NITRO+ Radeon RX 9070 Gaming OC 16GB
8.1/10

Overall score

Score
8.1/ 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 74% of models
Score components

40%

8.0

Technical score

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.6, the mark of a weaker model in this category

25%

8.1

List score

10%

10

Sentiment score

▲Better than 74% of graphics cards
7.7

Value for money

Value for money
7.7/ 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 75% of models
Score components

70%

8.1

Overall score

30%

6.7

Price

▲Better than 75%
8.0

Technical score

Technical score
8.0/ 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 68% of models
Score components

44%

7.4

Performance

24%

8.6

Memory

12%

8.3

Power

11%

9.4

Features

5%

4.9

Design

4%

9.1

Connectivity

▲Better than 68%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
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
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.6.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
8.1

List score

List score
8.1/ 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 (1)
List score: in 1 of 83 lists (1%)
★Better than 94%
  • sapphire-nitro-radeon-rx-9070-gaming-oc-16gb
  • sapphire-nitro-radeon-rx-9070-gaming-oc-16gb
  • sapphire-nitro-radeon-rx-9070-gaming-oc-16gb
sapphire-nitro-radeon-rx-9070-gaming-oc-16gb
sapphire-nitro-radeon-rx-9070-gaming-oc-16gb
sapphire-nitro-radeon-rx-9070-gaming-oc-16gb
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...

Graphics cards model ranking

Ranked #330 of 2,260 models in Graphics cards (Overall score)

Technical Specifications of graphics card Sapphire NITRO+ Radeon RX 9070 Gaming OC 16GB

Technical score
Technical score
8.0/ 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 68% of models
Score components:

44%

7.4

Performance

24%

8.6

Memory

12%

8.3

Power

11%

9.4

Features

5%

4.9

Design

4%

9.1

Connectivity

8.0
Reviews score
7.6
List score
8.1
Value for money
Value for money
7.7/ 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 75% of models
Score components:

70%

8.1

Overall score

30%

6.7

Price

7.7
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
24,000 points
Market range: <4k points – >34k points
This graphics card scores 24,000 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is higher than 74.9% of graphics cards and equal to 1.3% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
16,261 points
Market range: <0 points – >25k points
This graphics card scores 16,261 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is higher than 76.5% of graphics cards and equal to 0.3% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
25,388 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 25,388 points in PassMark G3D, which is higher than 58.4% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
14,163 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 14,163 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is higher than 54.6% 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 – >24 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
?
Memory bus width
256 bit
Market range: <64 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
2
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 2 DisplayPort outputs, which is fewer than 78.3% of graphics cards and equal to 9.8% 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
77.76 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 77.76 Gbps, which is faster than on 83.9% of graphics cards and equal to 1% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
220 W
Market range: <60 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
245 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card draws 245 W under peak load, which is higher than 56% of graphics cards and equal to 1.3% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
650 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 650 W PSU, which is lower than that of 39.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 13.9% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
245 W
Market range: <100 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
245 W
Show more
Size
?
Length
331 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >350 mm
This graphics card is 331 mm long, which is longer than 84% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.6% of graphics cards.
Height
129 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 129 mm tall, which is taller than 58.1% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.9% of graphics cards.
Slot width
4 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 4 slot/s, which is wider than 97.6% of graphics cards and equal in width to 2.3% of graphics cards.
Weight
2000 g
Market range: <500 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 2000 g, which is heavier than 89.1% of Graphics cards and equal to 2.2% of Graphics cards.
Show more

Sapphire NITRO+ Radeon RX 9070 Gaming OC 16GB vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 7.8% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,700 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,700 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 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
  • 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
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 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
  • 20% smaller process node
    This graphics card uses a smaller manufacturing process than the average graphics card (4 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    4 nm vs 5 nm
  • 28.2% higher sentiment score
    10.0 vs 7.8
  • 6.6% higher list score
    List score
    8.1/ 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 (1)
    List score: in 1 of 83 lists (1%)
    8.1 vs 7.6
  • 7.8% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,700 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,700 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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).
    2,025 vs 2,023
  • 77.8% higher ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a higher ray tracing score than the average graphics card (16,261 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    16,261 points vs 9,148 points
  • 62.4% higher gaming score
    This graphics card has a higher gaming score than the average graphics card (24,000 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    24,000 points vs 14,779 points
  • 3.17x higher FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP64 performance than the average graphics card (1.5 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    1.52 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 4.09x higher BF16 performance
    This graphics card has a higher BF16 performance than the average graphics card (145 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has BF16 performance of 35.48 TFLOPS.
    145 TFLOPS vs 35.48 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
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 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
  • 20% smaller process node
    This graphics card uses a smaller manufacturing process than the average graphics card (4 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    4 nm vs 5 nm
  • Newer PCIe version
    This graphics card supports a newer PCIe version than the average graphics card (5 vs 4).
    5.0 vs 4.0
  • 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
  • 3.6x higher DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (77.8 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    77.76 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps
  • 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
    Sapphire NITRO+ Radeon RX 9070 Gaming OC 16GB has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (frame generation vs multi frame generation).
    frame generation vs multi frame generation
  • 1.5 slot/s wider design
    This graphics card occupies more slots than the average graphics card (4 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    4 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 48.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (331 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    331 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 1 fewer DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (2 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    2 vs 3
  • 38.5% more expensive
    Sapphire NITRO+ Radeon RX 9070 Gaming OC 16GB is more expensive than the average graphics card (£720 vs £520).
    £720 vs £520
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
    Sapphire NITRO+ Radeon RX 9070 Gaming OC 16GB has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (frame generation vs multi frame generation).
    frame generation vs multi frame generation
  • 1 fewer DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (2 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    2 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
  • 1.5 slot/s wider design
    This graphics card occupies more slots than the average graphics card (4 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    4 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 48.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (331 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    331 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 97.2% heavier
    This graphics card is heavier than the average graphics card (2000 g vs 1,014 g). The average graphics card weighs 1,014 g.
    2,000 g vs 1,014 g
  • 4 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (129 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    129 mm vs 125 mm

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Sapphire NITRO+ Radeon RX 9070 Gaming OC 16GB

  • 16 GB of memory suits large textures and demanding games.
  • It scores 24000 points in 3DMark Time Spy.
  • A 64 MB Infinity cache keeps frequently used data close to the chip.
  • Two HDMI ports help when connecting a TV and a monitor.
  • FP16 speed of 72.3 TFLOPS helps AI and creative work.
  • A 77.76 Gbps DisplayPort link rate suits high-refresh monitors.

What customers don't like about Sapphire NITRO+ Radeon RX 9070 Gaming OC 16GB

  • At 331 mm and four slots, it needs a large case.
  • At 2000 g, it is heavy and needs proper support.
  • There is no CUDA support, so Nvidia-only software will not run.
  • There is no DLSS, so upscaling relies on FSR.
  • Two DisplayPort outputs limit how many monitors can connect this way.

Verdict

At 331 mm long and four slots wide, the Sapphire NITRO+ Radeon RX 9070 Gaming OC needs a large case and a firm mount. The 16 GB of memory and 64 MB Infinity cache suit demanding games, and it scores 24000 points in 3DMark Time Spy. It also has two HDMI ports, FSR, frame generation and ray tracing. Its ECC memory is an uncommon extra. Its 220 W draw calls for a 650 W power supply. The weight of 2000 g is a real concern, and the card has no CUDA or DLSS, so Nvidia-only software and that upscaler cannot run on it. It suits a Radeon owner with a big case who wants strong gaming performance and does not need Nvidia tools.

Compare Sapphire NITRO+ Radeon RX 9070 Gaming OC 16GB 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 Sapphire NITRO+ Radeon RX 9070 Gaming OC 16GB and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found