1 00:00:01,280 --> 00:00:08,880 At AMD, we believe in supporting transparent, independent coverage that 2 00:00:06,000 --> 00:00:14,080 helps customers make informed decisions. Ah, do you then? Well, then why the 3 00:00:11,280 --> 00:00:21,320 houble hockey sticks didn't you want to send us an 8 gig version of the 960 XT? 4 00:00:18,080 --> 00:00:23,920 Oh, it was based on regional market 5 00:00:21,320 --> 00:00:28,880 demand. Well, the last time I checked, we have a global audience. So, um, 6 00:00:26,880 --> 00:00:33,000 unless there's no demand for a review in the region of 7 00:00:30,279 --> 00:00:36,880 Earth, I don't really get that explanation. No, the more likely reason 8 00:00:35,360 --> 00:00:42,480 is that you were afraid that we would roast your 5060 competitor as hard as we 9 00:00:39,760 --> 00:00:46,559 roasted the 5060, so you put off sending it until we wouldn't have time to test 10 00:00:44,399 --> 00:00:52,160 it before the embargo. But, we can talk more about your shenanigans later. 11 00:00:48,399 --> 00:00:54,320 First, the 9060 XT 16 gig promises to be 12 00:00:52,160 --> 00:00:59,520 the best value card with a 60 in the name in about half a decade, matching 13 00:00:56,640 --> 00:01:06,200 the 5060 Ti 8 gig in performance, outdoing it with double the VRAMm and 14 00:01:02,000 --> 00:01:08,799 beating it on price, which sounds great, 15 00:01:06,200 --> 00:01:12,960 but it also might not be the right thing to buy. And I'll tell you why after I 16 00:01:11,040 --> 00:01:17,600 tell you something you do want to buy from our sponsor, Rocket Money. Take 17 00:01:15,280 --> 00:01:21,680 back control of your finances and start saving with Rocket Money's subscription 18 00:01:19,520 --> 00:01:28,759 cancelling, bill negotiation, and budgeting features. Get started for free 19 00:01:24,080 --> 00:01:28,759 using our link in the video description. 20 00:01:35,600 --> 00:01:42,799 1080p is both the most popular gaming resolution today and the most popular 21 00:01:40,400 --> 00:01:48,479 excuse for shipping kneecapped 8 gig cards like the 8 gig RTX 5060 which we 22 00:01:46,399 --> 00:01:53,040 purchased for this review since NVIDIA really doesn't seem to want reviewers 23 00:01:50,399 --> 00:01:58,880 testing those. But with all that said, the truth is if you are playing games at 24 00:01:54,960 --> 00:02:03,759 1080, AMD and NVIDIA are probably right. 25 00:01:58,880 --> 00:02:06,640 It is enough for now, but remember guys, 26 00:02:03,759 --> 00:02:11,400 this is the minimum spec for new AAA titles, and these are cards that cost 27 00:02:08,959 --> 00:02:17,280 $300 plus. Anywh who, across our suite of 28 00:02:14,480 --> 00:02:21,760 games that exist today, the 960 XT performs admirably, but not 29 00:02:19,239 --> 00:02:26,640 spectacularly, keeping up with the 5060 Ti cards, which cost at least $30 more 30 00:02:24,560 --> 00:02:32,720 and asserting a commanding lead over the anemic 5060 nonTi. It outperforms its 31 00:02:30,239 --> 00:02:37,840 last gen counterpart, the 7600 XT, by more than 30% most of the time, which is 32 00:02:35,760 --> 00:02:42,800 enough to highlight how truly awful that card was, but not enough to make the 33 00:02:39,840 --> 00:02:46,640 Intel ARC B580 look like a bad value. Intel's really standing out with their 34 00:02:44,480 --> 00:02:51,280 battle mage architecture. Of course, we would have loved to give you guys 8 gig 35 00:02:48,720 --> 00:02:56,000 numbers. So, this is merely conjecture, but at 1080p raster, you can expect 36 00:02:54,400 --> 00:03:00,560 pretty much identical performance numbers because it's essentially the 37 00:02:58,000 --> 00:03:06,400 same card, sands half of the memory. If we find time to throw one on the bench, 38 00:03:02,239 --> 00:03:06,400 we will have that linked at LT Labs down 39 00:03:07,720 --> 00:03:16,480 below. Okay, so what about the value proposition? Well, that depends. See, 40 00:03:13,599 --> 00:03:21,440 the 9060 XT actually comes in three variants. The 8 gig one that didn't 41 00:03:18,640 --> 00:03:26,879 arrive on time, the base clocked 16 GB model, and the OC variant from Sapphire 42 00:03:24,159 --> 00:03:32,319 that was sent to us. This one has higher power draw and boosted clocks compared 43 00:03:29,120 --> 00:03:34,319 to 16 gig nonoC cards. But other than 44 00:03:32,319 --> 00:03:40,720 that, all of the variants are built on the exact same Nav'i 44 GPU based on 45 00:03:37,440 --> 00:03:42,000 AMD's RDNA4 architecture. This new 46 00:03:40,720 --> 00:03:48,640 architecture brings a bunch of improvements that you can get a deep dive into in our 9070 series review, but 47 00:03:46,879 --> 00:03:53,280 here's the short version. Big improvements in ray tracing and AI that 48 00:03:50,799 --> 00:03:57,519 bring these cards up to speed almost with NVIDIA in non-traditional forms of 49 00:03:55,680 --> 00:04:00,720 rendering and a host of other improvements that allow them to 50 00:03:58,879 --> 00:04:06,000 sometimes even beat NVIDIA in traditional raster. Despite its similar 51 00:04:03,200 --> 00:04:10,080 sounding name though, these new GPUs are substantially cut down compared to their 52 00:04:08,159 --> 00:04:16,160 bigger brothers with about half as many compute units as the 9070 XT. Basically, 53 00:04:13,200 --> 00:04:23,199 they did this, which means we have half the memory bus width, but benefit from 54 00:04:19,040 --> 00:04:26,240 keeping the same IO and 16 PCIe Gen 5 55 00:04:23,199 --> 00:04:28,160 lanes. That last point is key for gamers 56 00:04:26,240 --> 00:04:33,360 who are holding on to older systems where a by8 interface like on some of 57 00:04:30,639 --> 00:04:38,320 NVIDIA and Intel's cards can result in a measurable performance loss. Oh, there 58 00:04:36,320 --> 00:04:42,960 is one thing I lied about on the IO. Interestingly, this card only has three 59 00:04:40,880 --> 00:04:46,720 display outputs. Now, most of you declared this to be a non-issue after 60 00:04:44,960 --> 00:04:52,080 the announcement, but it is the first time that I've seen a $300 card in years 61 00:04:49,440 --> 00:04:55,520 that didn't have four outputs. I digress, though. To compensate for the 62 00:04:53,680 --> 00:04:59,360 cut down die, AMD bumped up the clock speed so that you'll get a bit more than 63 00:04:57,520 --> 00:05:04,639 literally half of the performance of the 9070 XT, which is also why the card 64 00:05:02,000 --> 00:05:10,000 draws a bit over half the power in line with the 5060Ti 8 gig that AMD positions 65 00:05:07,600 --> 00:05:15,280 it against. And in combuster, our card seems to be right in line with the 5060 66 00:05:12,320 --> 00:05:20,560 Ti 8 gig. But interestingly, the story is a bit different in F-124. 67 00:05:18,160 --> 00:05:28,280 In this racing game, AMD's latest pulls an average 174 watts with a maximum 68 00:05:24,240 --> 00:05:32,880 spike of 225 watts. By comparison, the 69 00:05:28,280 --> 00:05:34,560 5060Ti 8 gig averages around 121 watts. 70 00:05:32,880 --> 00:05:38,240 Now, we don't know if this behavior will show up in every game, but this is 71 00:05:36,320 --> 00:05:43,039 enough for us to recommend going for a slightly beefier power supply than the 72 00:05:40,560 --> 00:05:47,520 450 W unit that AMD recommends. Thankfully, this is still relatively low 73 00:05:45,840 --> 00:05:52,080 power draw, meaning that these cards are pretty easy to tame. And even loaded by 74 00:05:50,080 --> 00:05:58,639 a power virus like Combuster, our card stayed both cool and quiet. Let's talk 75 00:05:55,039 --> 00:06:00,720 1440p gaming. AMD claimed 6% better 76 00:05:58,639 --> 00:06:07,280 gaming performance than the 5060 Ti 8 gig at 1440, but looking at our raster 77 00:06:03,960 --> 00:06:09,199 results, we just don't see it. They 78 00:06:07,280 --> 00:06:13,680 score a couple of wins in Alen Wake 2 and Last of Us Part One, but is it 79 00:06:11,680 --> 00:06:18,319 really that impressive of a win when NVIDIA's 8 gig cards can't complete the 80 00:06:16,080 --> 00:06:24,639 test and you just didn't submit your 8 gig card on time for testing? Especially 81 00:06:21,280 --> 00:06:27,919 when we factor in that the 960 XT 16 gig 82 00:06:24,639 --> 00:06:29,680 trails behind the 5060 Ti's and honestly 83 00:06:27,919 --> 00:06:33,840 doesn't even look that stellar against the 5060 in the remainder of our games 84 00:06:32,000 --> 00:06:38,319 here. If you're wondering, by the way, about how the 5070 compares to all this, 85 00:06:36,560 --> 00:06:42,160 we didn't retest that card for this review, so we didn't want to include 86 00:06:40,240 --> 00:06:46,880 stale numbers, but it's a little worse than the 9070 nonXT from back when we 87 00:06:44,560 --> 00:06:52,000 reviewed that. Moving on to ray tracing. Despite the massive leap in RT 88 00:06:49,120 --> 00:06:56,880 performance that came with RDNA4, AMD is still unable to match their direct 89 00:06:53,840 --> 00:07:00,080 NVIDIA competitors. In 1080p RT, the 90 00:06:56,880 --> 00:07:02,960 9060 XT falls well behind the 5060Ti 8 91 00:07:00,080 --> 00:07:07,520 gig in our suite of tests, which is sad. But what really jumped off the charts to 92 00:07:05,039 --> 00:07:13,360 me is NVIDIA's embarrassing loss here with the 5060 not even able to keep up 93 00:07:10,319 --> 00:07:15,599 with the 4060 Ti. I thought they had 94 00:07:13,360 --> 00:07:21,039 improved the ray tracing on Blackwell. What the heck happened? And in 1440p RT 95 00:07:19,280 --> 00:07:24,599 Cyberpunk, things don't look much better. Maybe we can find a happier 96 00:07:23,440 --> 00:07:29,360 story in productivity. No, not really. I mean, 97 00:07:27,199 --> 00:07:34,160 the nice thing about having 16 gigs of memory, if you do, is that it allows you 98 00:07:32,080 --> 00:07:38,160 to dip your toes into AI without being as limited. I mean, look at how all the 99 00:07:36,240 --> 00:07:43,120 8 gig cards fumble as we load up a larger model. But even with 16 gigs, AMD 100 00:07:41,039 --> 00:07:47,199 isn't even close to NVIDIA in terms of performance in our machine learning 101 00:07:44,479 --> 00:07:51,360 tests. It turns out, haha, software support is important. And that only 102 00:07:49,280 --> 00:07:59,520 becomes more clear as we move beyond AI to Blender. Optics go br and HIP 103 00:07:56,759 --> 00:08:03,440 go. Adjusting focus to content creation though, we see big improvements gen over 104 00:08:01,360 --> 00:08:07,639 gen from AMD and they even beat NVIDIA in Da Vinci Resolve, though they trail 105 00:08:05,280 --> 00:08:12,160 behind in the more popular Premier Pro benchmark. All right, well that's the 106 00:08:09,840 --> 00:08:18,240 performance. So, this has been a big load of NH so far. But hey, getting 16 107 00:08:15,440 --> 00:08:23,199 gigs of VRAM and 5060 Ti-ish performance for a theoretical $30 discount, that's 108 00:08:20,840 --> 00:08:28,400 something. It's just it's tough to justify the $50 jump over the 5060, 109 00:08:26,319 --> 00:08:34,399 whose price is tough to justify over a kick in the groin. I mean, to AMD's 110 00:08:31,039 --> 00:08:36,399 credit here, FSR4 has made huge strides, 111 00:08:34,399 --> 00:08:41,839 meaning that other than multiframe gen, which a lot of you aren't that into, AMD 112 00:08:39,680 --> 00:08:45,920 has near par on most of the features that gamers care about. Even their video 113 00:08:43,919 --> 00:08:50,800 encoder is almost as good as Envank these days. They just need to work on 114 00:08:48,000 --> 00:08:57,120 third party support for all of this stuff. So, at the end of the day then, I 115 00:08:54,560 --> 00:09:01,680 don't know. I'm left kind of frustrated. In recent years, AMD has slowly but 116 00:08:59,440 --> 00:09:05,760 surely caught up to NVIDIA in terms of performance and features, but they've 117 00:09:03,760 --> 00:09:13,120 also caught up in terms of their crappy behavior. Last gen, the 7600 XT had 16 118 00:09:09,440 --> 00:09:15,839 gigs and the 7600 nonXT had 8 gigs of 119 00:09:13,120 --> 00:09:19,040 VRAM. It was super easy to tell what you were buying from the name of the 120 00:09:17,279 --> 00:09:23,760 product. This time around, they've lumped both cards together with the same 121 00:09:21,360 --> 00:09:27,920 XT name and then at the same time, as far as we can tell, intentionally made 122 00:09:25,920 --> 00:09:32,880 it more difficult for media to review the 8 gig version, which could lead to 123 00:09:30,160 --> 00:09:38,080 consumer confusion. So AMD, your commitment to the press words kind of 124 00:09:35,519 --> 00:09:42,000 meaningless at this point. And speaking of meaningless promises, you still 125 00:09:40,240 --> 00:09:46,160 haven't managed to get your previous cards into the sales channel anywhere 126 00:09:44,240 --> 00:09:49,519 near MSRP, which means you've effectively given away any credibility 127 00:09:47,839 --> 00:09:56,800 that you might have had there, too. So bottom line, if you have 350 bucks or 128 00:09:53,200 --> 00:09:59,120 more to spend, you can buy a 960 XT, I 129 00:09:56,800 --> 00:10:02,560 guess. But I wouldn't recommend the 8 gig one if you want to get a longer 130 00:10:00,800 --> 00:10:07,600 lifespan out of your card or you want to upgrade your monitor to 1440p. And 131 00:10:05,200 --> 00:10:11,360 whichever one you choose, just don't smuggly tell yourself that you're 132 00:10:09,200 --> 00:10:15,440 supporting the good guy, because AMD's actions speak much louder than their 133 00:10:13,360 --> 00:10:20,560 words, and they seem content to just draft behind NVIDIA, both in good ways 134 00:10:18,160 --> 00:10:25,120 and bad, rather than aggressively jump out in front to delight PC gamers who 135 00:10:22,560 --> 00:10:30,560 don't have $800 plus dollars to spend on a GPU. AMD, this was kind of your shot. 136 00:10:28,720 --> 00:10:34,959 NVIDIA is super distracted at the moment, and unless you do more, your GPU 137 00:10:32,800 --> 00:10:40,079 division is going to continue to only resonate with a small niche of users who 138 00:10:37,279 --> 00:10:43,440 don't mind owning a punching bag. And I would deserve to be punched in the bag 139 00:10:41,440 --> 00:10:46,880 if I didn't segue to our sponsor, Squarespace. Whether your business is 140 00:10:45,360 --> 00:10:50,320 just getting off the ground or you've been in the dark ages of cold calling 141 00:10:48,560 --> 00:10:54,079 for a while, a website will give you that extra push to take things to the 142 00:10:52,240 --> 00:10:58,000 next level. That's where Squarespace comes in. Their Squarespace blueprint 143 00:10:56,079 --> 00:11:01,120 guided design system gives you the ultimate starter pack to get the 144 00:10:59,519 --> 00:11:05,839 creative juices flowing with professionally curated layout and 145 00:11:03,200 --> 00:11:10,240 styling options. Then once you've laid the foundation, use their fluid engine 146 00:11:07,839 --> 00:11:14,240 editor and its code-free drag and drop elements to customize to your heart's 147 00:11:12,000 --> 00:11:19,120 content. Your website also comes with integrated SEO tools and advanced 148 00:11:16,959 --> 00:11:22,880 analytics so you can optimize what's working and identify what might need a 149 00:11:21,040 --> 00:11:27,760 little tweaking. You can even set up your website to take payments via credit 150 00:11:25,040 --> 00:11:31,200 card, PayPal, and more. So, head on over to 151 00:11:29,079 --> 00:11:35,839 squarespace.com/LTT for a free trial and save 10% on your first purchase of a 152 00:11:33,519 --> 00:11:40,240 website or domain. If you guys enjoyed this video, go check out our review of 153 00:11:37,200 --> 00:11:41,760 the 9070 and 9070 XT. It dives a little 154 00:11:40,240 --> 00:11:45,040 bit deeper into the architectural changes with RDNA4.