• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB Shows Up In Early Time Spy Benchmark With Mixed Conclusions

Cpt.Jank

Staff
Staff member
Joined
Aug 30, 2024
Messages
159 (0.57/day)
AMD's upcoming Radeon RX 9060 XT has shown up in the news a number of times leading up to the expected retail launch, from AsRock's announcement to a recent Geekbench leak that put the RDNA 4 GPU ahead of the RX 7600 XT by a fair shout. Now, however, we have a gaming benchmark from 3DMark Time Spy showing the RX 9060 XT nearly matching the RX 7700 XT, and those results could still improve as drivers mature and become more stable. The benchmark results are courtesy of u/uesato_hinata, who got their hands on an XFX Swift AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB and posted their results on r/AMD on Reddit.

There are a few caveats to these performance figures, though, since the redditor who shared the results was using beta drivers and a moderate GPU overclock and undervolt—cited as "+200mhz clock offset -40mv undervolt +10% power limit, I can get 3.46Ghz at 199 W". With those performance tweaks, however, the RX 9060 XT puts up a respectable result of 14,210 points in 3DMark Time Spy. For comparison, the average RX 7700 XT scores 15,452 points in the same benchmark. However, it should also be noted that the gaming PC used in the RX 9060 XT benchmark in question was powered by a rather old AMD Ryzen 5 5600 paired with mismatched DDR4-2133 RAM, meaning there is likely at least some performance left on the table, even if GPU utilization seems consistently high in the 3DMark monitoring chart, indicating there was little bottlenecking limiting the performance. The redditor went on to benchmark the GPU in Black Myth: Wukong, where it managed a 64 FPS average at stock clocks at 1080p, with most settings set to high. Applying the overclock boosted average FPS to a mere 65 FPS, but increased the minimum FPS from 17 to 23. These numbers also won't be representative of the performance for all RX 9060 XT GPUs, since we know that AMD is launching both 8 and 16 GB versions of the RX 9060 XT with different GPU clock speeds for the different memory variants


View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source
 
Time Spy?

It’s nine years old. Why would anyone sane benchmark with it?
 
Time Spy?

It’s nine years old. Why would anyone sane benchmark with it?
TPU does OC testing for all GPUs in Timespy......
Age hardly matters as these benchmarks have almost no CPU overhead in graphics score so you can use them to compare (especially same generation) GPUs regardless of specs (almost). So we can say these results put this card about roughly about 7700XT level (using graphics scores). Not so great, not so bad.
 
TPU does OC testing for all GPUs in Timespy......
Age hardly matters as these benchmarks have almost no CPU overhead in graphics score so you can use them to compare (especially same generation) GPUs regardless of specs (almost). So we can say these results put this card about roughly about 7700XT level (using graphics scores). Not so great, not so bad.
Time spy is a nine year old test using nine year old GPU features.

From the documentation:
Time Spy uses DirectX 12 feature level 11_0.
It tests features from the GTX 400 days. It uses shader model 5.0.
Total irrelevancy today.
 
Last edited:
So what you recommend?
 
Time spy is a nine year old test using nine year old GPU features.

From the documentation:

It tests features from the GTX 400 days. It uses shader model 5.0.
Total irrelevancy today.
Well you can buy a 9060 and test it yourself. Timespy is perfectly fine as a benchmark.
 
Avoid double-sided memory. It is wasted on this card instead of being wired as 256-bit.
At 199 mm², it should have a 192-bit memory interface. No excuse.
 
If you’re going to use 3DMark then you use Port Royal.


You buy me one and I’ll test it. And the results will be just as irrelevant.
Or use the bench that has everything else already on there and compare those numbers. Are you paying the reviewer for their time to rerun every single card? Are you providing the hardware? You can get your own card if this is your hill and you're staying to it.
 
I got a better idea.

Someone buy me the card, I'll test it in Port Royal. I'll test it in any port. I don't care. Just give me the card.
 
We already have leaked numbers. The 16gb is 8% faster than a 3070ti...
 
Why would anyone sane benchmark with it?
The protagonist is on a cuter side.

On a more serious note, this is roughly 55% of the 9070 XT score. Doesn't come as a surprise. Maybe the best 9060 XTs out there could hit 18500+ but it's still not good enough. I'd get a used 4070 instead any day. Essentially the same price, faster and supports more stuff.
 
The protagonist is on a cuter side.

On a more serious note, this is roughly 55% of the 9070 XT score. Doesn't come as a surprise. Maybe the best 9060 XTs out there could hit 18500+ but it's still not good enough. I'd get a used 4070 instead any day. Essentially the same price, faster and supports more stuff.
Although this thing is laughable its also not fair to compare with used products.
 
Although this thing is laughable its also not fair to compare with used products.
5060s are so bad I'd buy a baseball bat collection instead. So... either used 4070 or baseball bats. 9060s and 5060s are way too horrible.
 
Although this thing is laughable its also not fair to compare with used products.

Why? I bet you most people are considering used or keeping their old card. It's absolutely fair.
 
Why? I bet you most people are considering used or keeping their old card. It's absolutely fair.
Because used products will always be cheaper. You don't even need to crosscompare products, a used 9070xt is cheaper than a new one, does that mean you shouldn't buy it new?
 
does that mean you shouldn't buy it new?
You indeed shouldn't. At least at these prices you definitely should abstain from feeding AMD because 800+ USD for THAT is extremely foul. They're getting away with active attempts to keep this market as stagnant as possible and we, as end users, have all the rights to boycott it. It's sad how many people buy this overpriced rubbish.
 
Around 7700XT level isn't terrible, but these cards need to be at MSRP to have any decent value.

And AMD aren't the ones stagnating the market, they're not the ones leading it with overpriced cards.
 
Because used products will always be cheaper. You don't even need to crosscompare products, a used 9070xt is cheaper than a new one, does that mean you shouldn't buy it new?

so you just buy 5090's? all the other products are cheaper, we can ignore them. Why all those comparison charts with cheaper and older cards? waste of time...

sort by more expensive is not a valid purchase decision
 
Its all about the price if its not under $600 AUS then its DOA here in Australia.
 
Has 50% less compute cores than RTX 9070 XT, a bit raised clocks and wow, it's only 55% of RTX 9070 XT performance. Who would have thought.
Just like RTX 5080 could not beat RTX 4090 and RTX 5060 Ti could not beat RTX 4070.
 
Time Spy?

It’s nine years old. Why would anyone sane benchmark with it?
Because it's still a good raster benchmark.

If you’re going to use 3DMark then you use Port Royal.
Time spy is still a perfectly good raster test.. And because it's older than port royal they have more tests on it for comparison.

But at some point they will shift I wouldn't be surprised if they are already testing on it to build a database for when they move or at least should be.

On a more serious note, this is roughly 55% of the 9070 XT score. Doesn't come as a surprise. Maybe the best 9060 XTs out there could hit 18500+ but it's still not good enough. I'd get a used 4070 instead any day. Essentially the same price, faster and supports more stuff.
Indeed even a 3 gen older 6800xt easily beats that. So my advice will be the same as it is for 5060/TI and 5070 buy a 6800xt if you just want raster.

Has 50% less compute cores than RTX 9070 XT, a bit raised clocks and wow, it's only 55% of RTX 9070 XT performance. Who would have thought.
Just like RTX 5080 could not beat RTX 4090 and RTX 5060 Ti could not beat RTX 4070.
It's not a good look that's for sure. Nvidia led the way AMD has followed they did the same last gen also. These cards don't even make sense at 300.00
 
Last edited:
So my advice will be the same as it is for 5060/TI and 5070 buy a 6800xt if you just want raster.
3080 Ti can do both raster and RT and also supports far better upscaling. 12 VS 16 GB VRAM don't matter at this price point. Dunno about other locations but in Russia, 3080 Ti is the same price as 6800 XT.
 
Back
Top