Is RX 9070 VRAM temperature regular value or hotspot?

[LittleBro]

Is the €940 for the Red Devil or Red Devil Limited Edition? I paid $790 for my non-LE Red Devil. Prices have gotten out of hand, for sure.

940 € incl. VAT for regular Red Devil, not LE.

 

[GrimReaper85]

On my 4070, it is under GPU Memory Junction Temperature in Hwinfo64, same for my 9070. I still have to decide if i keep it, it's a Powercolor Reaper 9070.
The GPU and GPU hot spot temps are great, but the vRAM goes to about 92ºC with 24ºC ambient. That means that in a few months it will go to about 100ºC since i have around 30-32ºC in my room in the summer months.

Now, *tin foil alert !
My 4070(Asus Dual) and my 9070 both draw about 200W, the 4070 is about 950 grams the 9070 is 860 grams. The Nvidia card is 10º hotter on the GPU core, but 10º cooler on the vRAM. How ?
The AMD card has PTM but no way that accounts to -10º while having the memory 10º hotter.
So, maybe AMD is under reporting the GPU temperature ? like on the first gen Ryzen there were two temperature readings for the CPU.

This are the two cards head-to-head

Something really is amiss here. Another post related to my Hellhound 7800 XT's low temperatures:

I

Post in thread 'Thermal testing two different size Gigabyte 5070 Ti cards - huge differences'

Apr 10, 2025

Solid front panel.
No doubt BoggledBeagle's conditions are better, but 17°C better? I doubt it.

I've seen differences in the 10-20c range solely due to case so it's still possible, he mentioned 20c ambient so let's say 4-5c from ambient and 10c from case and that's pretty much 17c with some margin of error

If 4090 can't be compared for whatever reason (cooler is actually 74 mm compared to 70 mm, not much difference), then how did PowerColor Hellhound 7800 XT had 62°C at 265W and 1165 rpm? That's 14°C less than 5070 Ti.

GPU thickness doesn't say much, and even with the same...

• insanee420

• 

Today I tested my RTX 4070 SUPER ASUS TUF Gaming OC and RX 9070 Gigabyte Gaming OC.

RTX 4070 SUPER ASUS TUF Gaming OC (1177 g) - 240W, 1500 rpm, room temperature 25°C - 81°C, Hot Spot 104°C, Memory 94°C
RX 9070 Gigabyte Gaming OC (1117 g) - 245W, 1500 rpm, room temperature 26°C - 64°C, Hot Spot 81°C, Memory 94°C
RTX 5070 Ti Gigabyte Gaming OC (1768 g) - 250W, 1500 rpm, room temperature 24°C - 67°C, Memory 76°C
RTX 3060 Ti Gigabyte Aorus Elite (1040 g) - 240W, 1500 rpm (it was beginning of December 2021, so I think 23°C in room) - 68°C, Hot Spot 78°C

It's just not possible for AMD to have 3°C less with 650 g lighter cooler (actually whole card, but we can simplify) and 17°C less with 60 g lighter cooler.

But if I look at my old Aorus Elite, it was Nvidia, and also as cold as an air cooled card can be, especially considering it weighed 1 kg and not 2 kg.
So looking at my 3060 Ti and 9070 temperatures, they seem to add up.

But for now, I can only say safest bet is to buy a 2 kg card if you want a cool card. Even 5070 Ti Gigabyte Gaming OC does not weigh as much and outside dimensions are the same as on 5080 and 5090.
My previous Palit 4080 and Gigabyte Gaming OC 4090 had 2 kg and they were cooler than 5070 Ti.

 

[droopyRO]

I returned that Reaper 9070 card. It was bottlenecked by my 12600K. After i decide to invest in an AM5 platform and a 7800X3D i will buy another 9070 since prices seem to drop slightly.
But that Powercolor Reaper hot spot temps were great ... if they were reported correctly This was the last test i made with it, it was at -60mV and -15% Power Target.

 

[AVATARAT]

RTX 4070 SUPER ASUS TUF Gaming OC (1177 g) - 240W, 1500 rpm, room temperature 25°C - 81°C, Hot Spot 104°C, Memory 94°C

You need to re-paste this card.

 

[rusty caterpillar]

I returned that Reaper 9070 card. It was bottlenecked by my 12600K. After i decide to invest in an AM5 platform and a 7800X3D i will buy another 9070 since prices seem to drop slightly.
But that Powercolor Reaper hot spot temps were great ... if they were reported correctly This was the last test i made with it, it was at -60mV and -15% Power Target.

Good decision.

Also a suggestion
Ryzen 7700 half the price of 7800X3D. Also 7700 will run cooler. As Ryzen has 7700 has 32mb cache vs 20 mb and higher core clock 5.3 vs 4.9(intel) IMO will not cap you future 9070 GPU. However if you find a good deal on 7800X3D than hell yea.



You can upgrade later the CPU for better one if is necessary.

You need to re-paste this card.

He also has a closed/solid front case panel with a small vent under and a bit on the sides. I suppose the 4070 was baking for some time in there and TIM is maybe brittle at this point.

 

[GrimReaper85]

I just bought this 4070 SUPER, only 5 months old. It's fine, only the first fan needs replacing, it's rattling just a little. Got one on AliExpress.
I noticed when hot spot rises to 110°C, only this first fan spins to 3600 rpm, although 100% in MSI Afterburner is 3200 rpm. It probably got bad this way from previous owner.

bequiet 802 is a fine case. It is quiet when you need it, but when gaming it takes only 5 seconds to remove the front panel and set the fan switch to 3 which sets fans at 1130 rpm.
I can shave off 8°C off of GPU this way.

9070 was in Phanteks Enthoo Luxe which also doesn't have much more air from the front, if any, compared to bequiet 802 with solid front panel. So I just took solid front panel numbers for 4070 SUPER and 5070 Ti.
Look at pictures of this case and you decide, but I think bequiet 802 is closer with front panel than without it.
But I know it's hard to compare GPUs in different cases. On top of that I have 8 SSDs on top of GPU and 3 behind the motherboard. Though they only have 30°C in idle, they must still heat up the GPU by 1°C, maybe even 3°C.
Even considering all this, 9070 Gigabyte Gaming OC is by far the coolest card.

 

[NSR]

But I know it's hard to compare GPUs in different cases. On top of that I have 8 SSDs on top of GPU and 3 behind the motherboard. Though they only have 30°C in idle, they must still heat up the GPU by 1°C, maybe even 3°C.

I didn't realise how much heavy lifting my case fans were doing until I broke my fan hub 2 days ago.

Mem temps went into the mid 90s under heavy load, bare in mind I've never seen them above 82. Fan hub got delivered, hooked everything up and back to normal.

 

[Krit]

Ryzen 7700 half the price of 7800X3D. Also 7700 will run cooler. As Ryzen has 7700 has 32mb cache vs 20 mb and higher core clock 5.3 vs 4.9(intel) IMO will not cap you future 9070 GPU. However if you find a good deal on 7800X3D than hell yea.

7700 is extremely good Value CPU i do not understand how the 9700X is actually even selling. Even 5700x3d is worse value than 7700 179€ vs 215€ and bare in mind that 7700 is around ~3% faster than 5800x3d at 1080p (Average FPS)

9700X is ~2% faster at 1080p (Average FPS)
9700X is ~1.2% faster at 1440p (Average FPS)

So basically the same performance for 64% more money 7700 179€ vs 9700X 294€. Well at least 7800X3D is faster and way better value than 9800X3D garbage which only is around ~3% to 3.5% faster at 1080p/1440p (Average FPS) for 34% more money.

 

[AusWolf]

7700 is extremely good Value CPU i do not understand how the 9700X is actually even selling.

9700X is ~2% faster at 1080p (Average FPS)
9700X is ~1.2% faster at 1440p (Average FPS)

So basically the same performance for 64% more money 179€ vs 294€. Well at least 7800X3D is faster and way better value than 9800X3D garbage which only is around ~3% to 3.5% faster at 1080p/1440p (Average FPS) for 34% more money.

People don't want the fastest, or the best value. They want the newest and most hyped hardware. This has been proven time and time again with Intel and Nvidia. Now with AMD.

 

[droopyRO]

Also a suggestion
Ryzen 7700 half the price of 7800X3D

There are other sites that publish better data for CPUs in gaming. https://www.computerbase.de/artikel...d-test.91949/seite-2#abschnitt_baldurs_gate_3
The 7700 is equal to a 12600K in gaming. On the same platform a 14600KF at 200$ is a way better option.
If i am to upgrade to DDR5 on AM5 platform, i either move directly to a 7800X3D or wait two more years for the next Zen chips.

 

[rusty caterpillar]

There are other sites that publish better data for CPUs in gaming. https://www.computerbase.de/artikel...d-test.91949/seite-2#abschnitt_baldurs_gate_3
The 7700 is equal to a 12600K in gaming. On the same platform a 14600KF at 200$ is a way better option.
If i am to upgrade to DDR5 on AM5 platform, i either move directly to a 7800X3D or wait two more years for the next Zen chips.

"There are other sites that publish better data for CPUs in gaming. https://www.computerbase.de/artikel...d-test.91949/seite-2#abschnitt_baldurs_gate_3"

That is way they left all the non X CPUs out of the tests? They really want you to have a clear image...

7700 is extremely good Value CPU i do not understand how the 9700X is actually even selling. Even 5700x3d is worse value than 7700 179€ vs 215€ and bare in mind that 7700 is around ~3% faster than 5800x3d at 1080p (Average FPS)

9700X is ~2% faster at 1080p (Average FPS)
9700X is ~1.2% faster at 1440p (Average FPS)

So basically the same performance for 64% more money 7700 179€ vs 9700X 294€. Well at least 7800X3D is faster and way better value than 9800X3D garbage which only is around ~3% to 3.5% faster at 1080p/1440p (Average FPS) for 34% more money.

Really don't need benchmarks at this point for 7700. I built 3 different PCs with 7700 and test the crap out, it holds very well and it will, for long time in the range of 100-150 FPS which is plenty for many people.

 

[AVATARAT]

7700 is extremely good Value CPU i do not understand how the 9700X is actually even selling. Even 5700x3d is worse value than 7700 179€ vs 215€ and bare in mind that 7700 is around ~3% faster than 5800x3d at 1080p (Average FPS)

9700X is ~2% faster at 1080p (Average FPS)
9700X is ~1.2% faster at 1440p (Average FPS)

So basically the same performance for 64% more money 7700 179€ vs 9700X 294€. Well at least 7800X3D is faster and way better value than 9800X3D garbage which only is around ~3% to 3.5% faster at 1080p/1440p (Average FPS) for 34% more money.

7700 corresponds very well to the price/quality ratio.
But actually the 9700x is the better processor in many ways.

One example, Horizon Zero Down benchmark, at the beginning of the benchmark when the camera is moving around the buildings, my old tuned 7700x can't load all textures fast enough, some textures appear almost a second slower and FPS drops by more than 30%. A stock 7700 would be even worse, the 9700x doesn't have this problem, so yes, for its price the 7700 is good, but its got its downsides and that's why the price is lower.

******
It's not all numbers (FPS), the 9700x can process threads fast closest to the 7900x which has 50% more cores (16 vs 24) and in games where your character movement in cities or anything with lots of textures around it, the 9700x is far superior to the 7700(x) and you can't see that in benchmarks that show pure FPS numbers.

 

[rusty caterpillar]

7700 corresponds very well to the price/quality ratio.
But actually the 9700x is the better processor in many ways.

One example, Horizon Zero Down benchmark, at the beginning of the benchmark when the camera is moving around the buildings, my old tuned 7700x can't load all textures fast enough, some textures appear almost a second slower and FPS drops by more than 30%. A stock 7700 would be even worse, the 9700x doesn't have this problem, so yes, for its price the 7700 is good, but its got its downsides and that's why the price is lower.

******
It's not all numbers (FPS), the 9700x can process threads fast closest to the 7900x which has 50% more cores (16 vs 24) and in games where your character movement in cities or anything with lots of textures around it, the 9700x is far superior to the 7700(x) and you can't see that in benchmarks that show pure FPS numbers.

My take on this. I believe AMD put an substantial effort in optimizing the 9000 series rather than the older 7000, as there is not enough raw power to show off for 9000 series, the rest has to be from optimizing 9000 for popular titles.

 

[AusWolf]

7700 corresponds very well to the price/quality ratio.
But actually the 9700x is the better processor in many ways.

One example, Horizon Zero Down benchmark, at the beginning of the benchmark when the camera is moving around the buildings, my old tuned 7700x can't load all textures fast enough, some textures appear almost a second slower and FPS drops by more than 30%. A stock 7700 would be even worse, the 9700x doesn't have this problem, so yes, for its price the 7700 is good, but its got its downsides and that's why the price is lower.

******
It's not all numbers (FPS), the 9700x can process threads fast closest to the 7900x which has 50% more cores (16 vs 24) and in games where your character movement in cities or anything with lots of textures around it, the 9700x is far superior to the 7700(x) and you can't see that in benchmarks that show pure FPS numbers.

Nearly a second's wait for textures to fully load? Is that worth the price difference?

 

[droopyRO]

That is way they left all the non X CPUs out of the tests? They really want you to have a clear image...

Happy now ? https://www.pcgameshardware.de/Ryze...Benchmark-Release-Preis-vs-7800X3D-1452291/2/

 

[AVATARAT]

Nearly a second's wait for textures to fully load? Is that worth the price difference?

This game is very CPU heavy and I only give it as an example because when someone explains - only 2% and if that is true then the difference seems nothing. I just said what the reality is and why the price is lower.

Is 7700 a good processor - yes, but it is cheap and we need to know why.


7700x + 7900 XT = 1080p - the processor is 80-90% used
9700x + 9070 XT = 1080p - the processor is used at 98-100% 75-85%
As you can see, this game "eats" the CPU.

 

[AusWolf]

This game is very CPU heavy and I only give it as an example because when someone explains - only 2% and if that is true then the difference seems nothing. I just said what the reality is and why the price is lower.

Is 7700 a good processor - yes, but it is cheap and we need to know why.

I don't think you notice that "why" 99% of the time, making the price difference not worth it, imo.

7700x + 7900 XT = 1080p - the processor is 80-90% used
9700x + 9070 XT = 1080p - the processor is used at 98-100%
As you can see, this game "eats" the CPU.

Sure, but as long as your FPS is alright, it doesn't matter, imo.

 

[AVATARAT]

Ok, I check it again and it seems that Adrenaline metter is lying to me, it shows 100% usage but it's really 75-85% in other tools (for 9700x).

Sure, but as long as your FPS is alright, it doesn't matter, imo.

There are nuances, but in general yes.

*****
And it's interesting, I know Adrenaline before shows CPU usage correctly because that's what I usually trust it for.
So I'll be looking a bit more carefully going the future.

 

[rusty caterpillar]

Ok, I check it again and it seems that Adrenaline metter is lying to me, it shows 100% usage but it's really 75-85% in other tools (for 9700x).

View attachment 398754


There are nuances, but in general yes.

*****
And it's interesting, I know Adrenaline before shows CPU usage correctly because that's what I usually trust it for.
So I'll be looking a bit more carefully going the future.

I usually monitor with HWinfo and load it in Riva OSD as necessary.

 

[AVATARAT]

View attachment 399095

I usually monitor with HWinfo and load it in Riva OSD as necessary.

I also used Afterburner before, but since the last Win reinstall I only want to see FPS/Frame Time/GPU temps, I don't really care about the others because I know my system well.

 

[Bomby569]

I also used Afterburner before, but since the last Win reinstall I only want to see FPS/Frame Time/GPU temps, I don't really care about the others because I know my system well.

if you knew your system well you'd never use Adrenaline.

 

[AVATARAT]

if you knew your system well you'd never use Adrenaline.

Why?
How you manage this settings without Adrenaline?
And yes they are very important.

 

[Krit]

if you knew your system well you'd never use Adrenaline.

It's decent for 7000/9000 Series no need for MSI afterburner when undervolting, setting fan speed, game settings etc. Only thing that's bad in my opinion is screen capture OBS in this area is way, way better.

 

[rusty caterpillar]

if you knew your system well you'd never use Adrenaline.

Undervolting and power caps maybe some other settings.

 

[rusty caterpillar]

Nearly a second's wait for textures to fully load? Is that worth the price difference?

Yeah my CPU swings between 75-100 % usage when changing maps in The Witcher 3 DX11 than stabilizing on 20-30 % usage when map is loaded.