RDNA3 RX7000 Seriess! Owners Thread, Tests, Benchmarks, Screenshots, Overclocks, & Tweaks!

i have xfx 7900xtx merc, win 11 and latest amd drivers.

my problem if i overclock gpu no problem, i can achieve 32.5k gpu score on timespy but when i try to underclock it when i am playing less demanding games, i cant control gpu.

i undervolt and limit gpu mhz between 500-2500 with stock vram settings. in game gpu sometimes works at 3000mhz and vram boosts to 2700 mhz. i cant make gpu work, at 2500 gpu & 2400 vram mhz, it always boosts to anormal levels and it raises power consumption and temps. (by the way my card never reached beyond 55 degree on core and 75 degree on junction).

i guess it is a driver issue but i dont want my gpu to boost 3000 mhz when i am in the menu of a random game.

 

Instead of uc, you could just use the chill option in Adrenaline and just set your preffered min/max fps, per game. You'll end up with a much better and stable result.

 

Hey guys, I have a MERC 310 RX 7900 XTX back home, I'll only get to install it when I get back 'round mid February. My question involves the use of vertical and/or angle mounts for my card. I've found a mount that allows me to either mount the card vertically, or set it at an angle for better air flow (in case vertically mounting the card lessen airflow due to fan intakes on card is too near the side panel). One of the reasons why I'm thinking of vertical or angled bracket/mount is due to ugly back plate on the MERC 310 (why didn't XFX go with black?)....so, it's mostly an aesthetics thing.

Using the vertical mount is not the question I wanna ask, rather, it's how it affects the card. I know my card has a vapor chamber built into its cooling, so would vertically mounting it affect how the cooling works? I've read that perhaps mounting it vertically (not sure about effects when mounted at angle) might result in higher temp because it affects tghe way the vapor chamber works, or some other odd detriment to cooling (really not sure).

I'm concern because I really like the idea of a vertical or angled GPU mount/bracket, but have heard it might affect cooling....anyone has any insights to feedback would be most appreciated. Any link to articles and/or reviews about vertically mounting GPU (so far, on downside is higher temps due to the fans being too close to side panel which impedes airflow), would be most appreciated as well.

 

I return 7900 XTX (Made by AMD) & got RTX 4080 FE (next week). i'm sorry but this is not acceptable AMD.

 

card hasn't been put together properly, there is uneven pressure on the gpu thanks to screwing in the wrong order.

 

That junction temp is a killer, it's downclocking to prevent damage so isn't normal regardless what AMD say. Anyone complaining of 110c junction temperatures should be able RMA with no issue (if AMD accepts screwed up), it's faulty from the factory/production line.

 

If i didnt read it i would not even believe other people are having problems with junction temps. I have the Sapphire made reference 7900XTX and maximum junction i seen was around 80-85°C during really extreme load, also i have 1090mV undervolt and the power limit to maximum so it takes about 400W. And people are hitting 110°C junction even at 300W

this is during cyberpunk, 4k, i set everything on maximum, even turned on raytracing and just let it run for about 30-40minutes, maximum junction temp 70°C, did i won the 7900xtx lottery?

oh yeah and i set the fan curve to hit 100% during any gaming load, i was used to the 1080ti FE with blower fan, so the 7900xtx is quiet for me even with fan at 100% and i get these great temps then

 

Just means Sapphire designed a proper heat solution

 

Probably there is not enough pressure on the backplate and you need to do a washer mod, again.

 

Some cards are having these issues.

I heard about that but I'm not dealing with opening the GPU, etc. then the RMA process is a pain on top I have to ship it back then wait. I went to the store and returned it and order 4080 FE.

 

no, its just distributed poorly because some cards have been put together from the outside in instead of the inside out.

 

Had some time to configure the 7900 XTX, overclocking doesn't really do much and instead it just seems to achieve drawing more power for non-existent gains.
With GPU-Z updated to support these the sensor readout also shows a 1.050v to the GPU core even if the default in Wattman is a 1.150v target but the card seems to rarely ever actually hit that.

First bios on this particular mode (XFX 310 Speedster Merc 7900 XTX) is actually locked but the second one can be freely tweaked.
Merc 310 Fan behaviour : According to XFX support there is no Fan Stop/ 0 Rpm mode on the first Bios : Amd (reddit.com)

So far the best results have been with the usual adjustment to a manual fan curve and after that I lowered down the clock speed to roughly what the card actually holds instead of aiming for what Wattman had as a 3010 Mhz target clock speed.
In effect that just caused the card to constantly try boosting and increased power draw but despite the wattage and voltage availability the GPU still holds around 2.8 - 2.9 Ghz effectively in most games I have tested.

A slight bump to memory speeds from 2496 to 2700, activate fast timings and then reducing the target clock speed to 2.8 Ghz which has resulted in around a 300W power draw and GPU-Z reads 0.9 - 1.0v GPU from the GPU voltage sensor now.
Framerate is basically unchanged and the card operates around 50 Celsius in temperature with a 70 Celsius hotspot.
Holding under the 85 Celsius where from what I've read is otherwise were the card starts throttling and way below the 110 threshold it has and which some of these cards unfortunately seem to hit.


As to how the card performs and compares to the previous 6800 I had the power draw even at idle is higher but the multi chip configuration probably requires this.
AMD can likely improve it further and the newer 22.12.2 drivers already improved on it a little while solving a couple of the initial known issues.

Looks like the card comes with support for Display Port 2.1 but cabling here comes in a 10, 13.5 and 20 "UHBR" configuration resulting in 40, 54 and 80 GB/s bandwidth respectively.
I have only seen UHBR10 cables so far, comparably HDMI 2.1 and its 48 GB bandwidth would be superior to that albeit not by much.
The card itself also supports 13.5 and not the full UHBR20 support though 54 GB for bandwidth would still be higher than HDMI 2.1 when used with newer displays and higher refresh rates outside of using DSC.
(I don't think there actually is anything available yet that is using Display Port 2.x support however.)
RDNA 3 GPUs Support DP 2.1 At 54Gbps for "4k480" (must be DSC), Also 8k60 AV1 Encode/Decode (x-post /r/HFR) : hardware (reddit.com)


Testing done so far here holds up pretty well to what the card is performing like in the reviews I have read so it achieve very near a 2x performance uplift over the 6800 which is impressive.
Cost is the big downside though, this was a hefty 1300 Euro via Amazon Sweden and importing it throughout Europe and due to the cost its not something I can really recommend.

Retail pricing and the situation for GPU availability and costs here in Sweden the 7900 XT is now over 1100 Euro following a recent price increase and the XTX starts at 1400 for the "MRP" marked reference models.
There's no stock here but more should arrive for February especially the customs models which I am curious to see although pricing is looking to be absolutely terrible.
For NVIDIA the situation is much the same but the cards are higher priced still.
It was this or buying a 4080 but for those the price difference would still have been between 400 up to 800 Euro and the 4090 is in a price class of its own above 2500 Euro or more depending on model.

Really isn't worth it, far to expensive which was only barely bridged by selling the 6800 since they still go for near 1000 Euro at retail because RDNA2 only saw limited discounts here. (Mainly the Red Devil 6900 XT, XTX and the 6950 variants.)

7900 XT model with how these lose an entire MCM or chiplet also see a bigger performance drop when at 3840x2160 or higher, this time it was just going for the flagship as to avoid losing over 20% performance from that.


Needs driver work as an unfortunate recurring usual but over time as AMD resolves the media playback power draw, multi display power draw and VR performance issues this is a really fast card.
Although it is also impossible to recommend it due to the pricing situation and the way the XT is not that much cheaper yet drops off in performance at higher resolutions.
In countries where the NVIDIA 4000 series is closer aligned in pricing the 4080 might be a better pick here as a result.


EDIT:
My way of testing the card is still pretty simplistic, mostly involves just test a few games, checking the clock speeds and GPU voltage readout and power draw here.
Then drop the clock speed maximum or the target clocks towards what the card actually achieves instead of having it boosting ineffectively.

Lowering down the power the card draws, reducing the GPU voltage and a good reduction to GPU temperature especially the delta between the regular and hotspot and resulting hotspot temperature.

Any performance lost can be gained by a slight bump to memory clocks and trying fast timings.
This also needs more careful testing though, clock stretching and stability is a concern with memory adjustments as well.

Manual fan speed helps, particularly with things like how the higher wattage draw negates zero RPM support since its above the limit for where this can kick in.
Also makes for a more pleasant fan curve in terms of noise levels and no sudden fan ramping up behavior.


EDIT:
There's nothing really new here, its another curve with how Wattman seem to behave and how it works just like RDNA2 but a bit more difficult to test out and adjust.
Tinkering with the voltage curve slider just seem to lead to stability problems or clock stretching from what I managed to achieve and without any gains either to performance or the maximum GPU clocks that were possible.
So just targeting the actual achieved clock speeds and reigning in the GPU trying to constantly boost above that just worked better for me and reduced the rest as part of how the performance curve now works.

It also reduces the wattage the card draws by over 100W again affecting GPU temperature and there's not much of a loss of performance for these gains outside of specialized benchmark programs.

GPU-Z also reporting 1050mv or v or whatever I'm writing it out as is interesting but not something I have looked into further, different workloads, application or maybe ray tracing.
The card can briefly push into 1100 but it also quickly drops back down again, potentially 3.0 Ghz or above could be done if it could hold 1100 to the 1150 maximum.
(And without clock stretching.)

I also put the power limit to +15% but it doesn't seem to do all that much, this model has a third 8-pin and a slightly higher power TDP in bios if I'm using the right term here but it is still very conservative and looking at the Nitro or Red Devil the results are much the same.
An up to of maybe 5% more performance if the clock speeds can be sustained at a higher level but for over 20% more power drawn and the effect that has on GPU temperature.



EDIT: Hmm too much text, should use more screengrabs to break it up a bit better.
The card performs well, software needs some work and as usual undervolting and reigning in the default card behavior has the best effect. (At least in my own testing.)

I am sure it can be overclocked and configured a bit better but it seems to just demand a lot more power for a minimal gain and with clock stretching and the performance curve and potential instabilities it just doesn't seem to be worth it.
(Benchmarking, record breakage or breaking the 3 Ghz clock speed barrier are still things that could be done though. )

 

Quote (videocardz.com):
1. Architecture architects made mistakes so RDNA 3 can't feed the cores -> miserable 34% from gen to gen with massive specs differences.
2. Software team made mistakes so RDNA 3 has beta drivers.
3. And now looks like they designed a vapor chamber with issues.

Hmm, not good at all.

 

AMD just ain't AMD if they aren't shooting themselves in the foot somehow, that trait has been very consistent.

 

...and Sapphire is usually the first to come out with a solid version

 

Do we have a proof any of these cards actually broke? Its running hot but "within a spec" still the do work and perform as it should.

Everyone should just get a custom cooling solution anyway.

 

so they were designed to operate at 110 degrees ?