PowerColor Radeon RX 9070 XT Red Devil & HellHound Reportedly Boost Beyond 3.0 GHz

[T0@st]

AMD enforced strict conditions upon its manufacturing partners at the recently concluded CES trade event—various custom Radeon RX 9070 XT and RX 9070 (non-XT) models were showcased, but technical details were not revealed. The TechPowerUp team had a hands-on look at PowerColor's selection of Red Devil, Hellhound cards and newly debuted Reaper design—certain information could be pertained from labels and stickers (cough: 16 GB VRAM) yet brand reps remained tight-lipped about technical nitty gritty under-the-hood. News outlets have relied upon less-than-official sources—such as the Chiphell forum—to obtain performance figures. VideoCardz's working weekend session has produced alleged details about PowerColor's planned boost clock speeds—the headline being that a 3.0 GHz barrier has been broken.

The site's insider network proposes that PowerColor's top-flight Radeon RX 9070 XT Red Devil model is ready for launch with an OC BIOS set to boost matters up to 3060 MHz, while the silent performance mode shaves off fifty—bringing things down to a (still impressive) 3010 MHz. The more middle-of-the-pack Hellhound design is reported to achieve a 3010 MHz boost via its OC BIOS mode, and its silent operation is reported to be 2970 MHz. Additionally, a VideoCardz source reckons that game clocks are somewhere in the region of 2460 to 2520 MHz for both models. The "more affordable" PowerColor Radeon RX 9070 XT Reaper variant seems to lack BIOS switching, so its single operational mode is allegedly capable of boosting up to 2970 MHz.




VideoCardz also mentions boost clock information regarding PowerColor's Radeon RX 9070 (non-XT) offerings. Industry moles posit that the non-XT Red Devil and Hellhound cards can boost "up to 2590 MHz and 2700 MHz." The non-XT Reaper could be assigned a game clock of 2070 MHz, and a boost clock of 2520 MHz.



Other leaks have revealed supposed core counts—4096 for XT, 3584 for non-XT—yet VideoCardz is hungrily pursuing further details, including TBP info.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[Daven]

I suggest TPU write a follow up article after RDNA4 launches that says which leaks were right and which were wrong.

 

[Chrispy_]

if the quiet bios is only 50MHz slower that means that these 9070XT OC models are really being pushed to the point of absurdity. I'm quietly hoping the 330W rumours of a 9700XT are overblown and that they run almost as fast at, say, 250W.

The 7800XT defaults to 263W TDP but when I crank the power slider all they way down to 210W and drop about 200mv off the core voltage, it benchmarks at the same speed, within margin of error.
That's how I daily-drive it....

 

[k0vasz]

all these extra MHz just yields a lot of extra wattage/heat, and like 1 additional fps

I'd love to see undervolted cards with much smaller wattage/heat sinks, and a tiny bit lower fps, than these OC'd cards

 

[Event Horizon]

Undervolting remains mandatory.

 

[remekra]

Shouldn't be too hard, considering my 7900XTX Nitro+, at 460W and 1100mV in most games hovers around 2800-2900MHz.

 

[Kapone33]

3 GHZ is not new.

 

[bonehead123]

Turn it...

Burn it...

Churn it....

'nuff said

 

[Kapone33]

The first AMD GPU I ever saw do 3 GHZ was the 6500XT. Even the VRAM on that chip would go as high as 2800 MHZ.

 

[Steevo]

Mine is running F@H and games at 3.1Ghz

 

[AnotherReader]

3 GHZ is not new.

View attachment 379862

Typically, actual clocks are higher than listed boost clocks and 3 GHz boost clock is new. The reference 7900 XTX has a boost clock of 2500 MHz, but in TPU's review, it has an average clock speed of 2631 MHz in 25 games.

 

[Visible Noise]

Just use it heat up your dinner.

 

[DaemonForce]

3 GHZ is not new.

Still excited for it. Will be nice to finally have a card that starts where my current one stops.
Especially one that can suddenly pull over 2x speed comfortably. Waterblocked cards may go higher.

 

[Jtuck9]

Just use it heat up your dinner.

Beelzebub himself as the guest of honour!

 

[mb194dc]

3 GHZ is not new.

View attachment 379862

There's a lot of performance left to be tweaked out of the 7900xt, with the voltage curve, undervolt, higher boost clocks combined with more power limit. Also the 5th and 6th generation. Probably this 9 series is nearer the limits at stock...

 

[Lew Zealand]

if the quiet bios is only 50MHz slower that means that these 9070XT OC models are really being pushed to the point of absurdity. I'm quietly hoping the 330W rumours of a 9700XT are overblown and that they run almost as fast at, say, 250W.

The 7800XT defaults to 263W TDP but when I crank the power slider all they way down to 210W and drop about 200mv off the core voltage, it benchmarks at the same speed, within margin of error.
That's how I daily-drive it....

My 7700 XT works the same way:

Lose 1% performance with the power slider down from 230 to 206W
Gain back 1-2% performance using the -100mV curve
OC the VRAM for another 1-2%

-10% power for higher fps.

 

[freeagent]

Mine is running F@H and games at 3.1Ghz

Just curious on what kind of of output are you getting?

I do about 17M PPD if I let it run.

 

[Kapone33]

Typically, actual clocks are higher than listed boost clocks and 3 GHz boost clock is new. The reference 7900 XTX has a boost clock of 2500 MHz, but in TPU's review, it has an average clock speed of 2631 MHz in 25 games.

Unitl you put it in a Waterblock.

 

[Steevo]

Just curious on what kind of of output are you getting?

I do about 17M PPD if I let it run.

I’m at 7million ppd is all, I keep getting large memory units but low points. Using V8 client and my passkey to receive advanced units. It’s only using 15 threads for the CPU client and it closes both units when one completes and every so many steps it stops to save progress. I’m sure using a different client would change things for more performance.

 

[Chrispy_]

One of the things I'd like to see with the 9000-series is less restrictive power limits. For the RX 7000-series, power limits seemed to be BIOS-locked to a pretty small range of adjustment. My Sapphire cards only went down as low as -10% and the Gigabyte card only goes down to -20%.

If these rumours of 330W TDP are accurate, that means that -10% is still basically 300W and even with -20% we're still looking at a minimum power draw of ~265W which is likely still above the efficiency sweet-spot.

 

[3valatzy]

One of the things I'd like to see with the 9000-series is less restrictive power limits. For the RX 7000-series, power limits seemed to be BIOS-locked to a pretty small range of adjustment. My Sapphire cards only went down as low as -10% and the Gigabyte card only goes down to -20%.

If these rumours of 330W TDP are accurate, that means that -10% is still basically 300W and even with -20% we're still looking at a minimum power draw of ~265W which is likely still above the efficiency sweet-spot.

I support you with this.
But we know that AMD never hears - someone must tell them that 3 GHz won't help, actually it will make the matters much worse. The market needs very fast 150-200W cards, not shitty clocked monsters which barely achieve 5 FPS more than the 100 W lower cards.
This means - vote with your wallet.

 

[Visible Noise]

One of the things I'd like to see with the 9000-series is less restrictive power limits. For the RX 7000-series, power limits seemed to be BIOS-locked to a pretty small range of adjustment. My Sapphire cards only went down as low as -10% and the Gigabyte card only goes down to -20%.

If these rumours of 330W TDP are accurate, that means that -10% is still basically 300W and even with -20% we're still looking at a minimum power draw of ~265W which is likely still above the efficiency sweet-spot.

Really? I'm surprised, my 4090 allows -67%.

 

[Lew Zealand]

Really? I'm surprised, my 4090 allows -67%.

100% this. I dunno why some/many Radeon GPUs are "restricted" in the range of power limits while my Nvidia GPUs are variously limited down to 75%, 67% and even 62%. Older Radeons allow even 50%! But the newer ones are like 90% or similar. Too narrow a range.

You can get similar-esque results with clock restriction (I prefer this on Nvidia GPUs and most Radeons to be fair) but I'd like the option to use either.

 

[Chrispy_]

This means - vote with your wallet.

If you vote for Nvidia you're voting for the same thing though. All of NVidia's TDPs have increased this generation, since they're adding more cores to most SKUs and are still on the same process as the 40-series.

Intel don't have anything above the entry-level right now, They desperately need B580's success in the next performance tier up, but it's not even close to release yet!