AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT vs AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep: the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT wins all ten head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the RX 5700 XT. The largest margin appears in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, where the 7900 XT scores 5623 versus 2134 for the 5700 XT, a delta of -62% from the older card's perspective. That is more than a 2.6x raw score advantage, indicating a generational leap in sustained DX12 workload performance rather than a marginal uplift.

The second-largest gap shows up in PassMark DirectX 11, where the 7900 XT records 340 against 116 for the 5700 XT, a -65.9% delta. This test is particularly relevant for older game engines and productivity tools that still rely on DX11. The 5700 XT's 116 score is not merely lower; it trails by nearly three times, suggesting that the newer architecture handles legacy API paths with far more efficiency. Similarly, PassMark GPU Compute shows the 7900 XT at 16828 versus 7650, a -54.5% delta, reinforcing that raw compute throughput is roughly doubled.

The narrowest win for the 7900 XT is in GeekBench Vulkan, scoring 71068 against 68310, a modest -3.9% delta. This is the only test where the two cards approach parity, and it hints that the 5700 XT's RDNA 1.0 Vulkan driver path remains surprisingly competitive in low-level API scenarios. In contrast, GeekBench OpenCL shows a wider -25.3% delta (12756 vs 9524), indicating that OpenCL compute favors the newer card more strongly than Vulkan does.

PassMark DirectX 12 also shows a substantial gap: 110 for the 7900 XT versus 64 for the 5700 XT, a -41.8% delta. While the absolute scores are low for both cards relative to other tests, the relative difference is consistent with the overall trend. PassMark DirectX 9 shows a -29.8% delta (322 vs 226), and PassMark DirectX 10 shows -38.6% (158 vs 97). The 2D test (PassMark G2D) is the second-narrowest margin: 1232 versus 922, a -25.2% delta. This suggests that even in lighter, non-3D workloads, the 7900 XT holds a clear but not overwhelming advantage.

The most representative overall metric, PassMark G3D, shows the 7900 XT at 29009 versus 16277 for the 5700 XT, a -43.9% delta. This is a strong indicator of real-world gaming performance across a broad spectrum of titles. The data leaves no ambiguity: the 7900 XT is faster in every recorded benchmark, with the average delta across all tests sitting well above 30%.

The Verdict

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT is the superior performer in every measured scenario. It wins all ten head-to-head comparisons. The 5700 XT does not win a single test. For any user prioritizing raw frame rates, compute throughput, or API compatibility, the 7900 XT is the clear choice from the data alone.

However, the database also contains an interesting anomaly in the aggregate scores. The 5700 XT has an average benchmark score of 16361, while the 7900 XT has an average of only 13745. This is counterintuitive given the head-to-head sweep. The explanation lies in the percentile rankings: the 5700 XT sits at the 59th percentile of all GPUs, while the 7900 XT sits at the 55th. This suggests that the 7900 XT's average is dragged down by its inclusion of lower-scoring tests in its aggregate pool, or that the database's averaging methodology weights different test suites unevenly. The nearest rivals for each card reinforce this quirk: the 5700 XT's closest competitor is the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M (avg 16351, delta +0.1%), while the 7900 XT's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon 660M (avg 13812, delta -0.5%). These are not comparable performance tiers, yet the averages place them close.

For a buyer, the launch MSRP for the 5700 XT was 399 USD, and for the 7900 XT it was 899 USD. The data shows the 7900 XT delivers anywhere from 3.9% to 65.9% more performance per benchmark, but the aggregate score paradox means that the 5700 XT may still appear in lower-tier rankings. The practical verdict from the head-to-head data is that the 7900 XT is the only sensible pick for demanding workloads, while the 5700 XT remains a legacy option for those who prioritize its specific benchmark profile or lower power draw (225 W vs 300 W).

Where Each One Wins

The 5700 XT wins nowhere in the direct comparisons. Every single recorded benchmark, from 3DMark Steel Nomad to PassMark G2D, favors the 7900 XT. That said, the 5700 XT does have a statistical edge in one sense: its average benchmark score (16361) is higher than the 7900 XT's (13745), and its percentile (59th) is higher as well. This is not a performance win in any specific test, but it means that in the database's overall ranking, the older card might appear more favorably when averaged across all GPUs.

The 7900 XT wins decisively in compute-heavy scenarios. PassMark GPU Compute shows a -54.5% delta, and GeekBench OpenCL shows -25.3%, indicating that the newer card handles parallel compute tasks with significantly more headroom. It also wins massively in DX11 (-65.9%) and DX12 (-41.8%), which are the most common API paths for modern games. For 3DMark Steel Nomad, the -62% delta confirms that the 7900 XT is built for next-generation rendering workloads, likely due to its ray tracing capabilities (84 RT cores) and higher shading unit count (5376 vs 2560).

FAQ

Q: Is the RX 5700 XT faster in any benchmark?

A: No. The recorded head-to-head data shows the RX 7900 XT winning all ten tests, with the 5700 XT trailing by deltas ranging from -3.9% (GeekBench Vulkan) to -65.9% (PassMark DX11).

Q: Why does the RX 5700 XT have a higher average benchmark score than the RX 7900 XT?

A: The database lists the 5700 XT with an average of 16361 and the 7900 XT with 13745. This is due to different benchmark pools and weighting. The 5700 XT's nearest rival averages 16351, while the 7900 XT's averages 13812, so the aggregate scores reflect the surrounding competition, not the head-to-head deltas.

Q: Which card has better Vulkan performance?

A: The RX 7900 XT leads in GeekBench Vulkan with 71068 versus 68310 for the 5700 XT, a -3.9% delta. This is the smallest margin in the entire comparison, so the 5700 XT is relatively closer in Vulkan than in any other API.

Q: Does the RX 7900 XT have ray tracing hardware?

A: Yes. The database records 84 RT cores for the RX 7900 XT, while the RX 5700 XT lists no RT cores. This explains the large 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 delta (-62%), as that test likely exercises ray tracing paths.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The RX 7900 XT has 800.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 448.0 GB/s for the 5700 XT, a 78.6% advantage. Memory size also differs: 20 GB vs 8 GB, and bus width is 320 bit vs 256 bit.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The RX 5700 XT has a TDP of 225 W, while the RX 7900 XT has a TDP of 300 W. The suggested PSU for the 5700 XT is 550 W, and for the 7900 XT it is 700 W. The newer card consumes more power but delivers far higher performance.

Architecture Differences

The two cards belong to entirely different RDNA generations. The RX 5700 XT uses the Navi 10 chip on RDNA 1.0, fabricated on a 7 nm process by TSMC. The RX 7900 XT uses the Navi 31 chip on RDNA 3.0, with the codename Plum Bonito, fabricated on a 5 nm process. The transistor counts are starkly different: 10,300 million for the 5700 XT versus 57,700 million for the 7900 XT, a 5.6x increase. Die size also grows from 251 mm² to 529 mm², although transistor density improves dramatically from 41.0M / mm² to 109.1M / mm².

The shading units jump from 2560 on the 5700 XT to 5376 on the 7900 XT, and TMUs go from 160 to 336. ROPs increase from 64 to 192, a 3x change. The 7900 XT introduces 84 RT cores, a feature absent from the 5700 XT. Both lack tensor cores. The RDNA 3.0 architecture also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus DirectX 12 (12_1) on the older card, meaning the 7900 XT can handle more advanced graphics features like mesh shaders and variable rate shading.

Clock speeds tell a more complex story. The 5700 XT has a higher base clock (1605 MHz vs 1387 MHz), but the 7900 XT boosts higher (2394 MHz vs 1905 MHz) and has a higher game clock (2025 MHz vs 1755 MHz). The memory clock also rises from 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) to 2500 MHz (20 Gbps effective). The FP32 throughput is a dramatic leap: 9.754 TFLOPS for the 5700 XT versus 51.48 TFLOPS for the 7900 XT, a 5.3x difference. FP16 (2:1) scales similarly, from 19.51 TFLOPS to 103.0 TFLOPS.

Specification Differences

The most obvious difference is memory. The 5700 XT has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 7900 XT has 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 320-bit bus with 800.0 GB/s bandwidth. That is a 2.5x capacity increase and a 78.6% bandwidth increase.

Power delivery also differs: the 5700 XT uses 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin connectors, while the 7900 XT uses 2x 8-pin. TDP is 225 W versus 300 W, and suggested PSU is 550 W versus 700 W. Both are dual-slot cards, but dimensions vary: the 5700 XT is 272 mm long, 111 mm high, and 36 mm wide; the 7900 XT is 276 mm long, 110 mm high, and 51 mm wide, making it slightly longer but much thicker.

Display outputs are a clear generational split. The 5700 XT offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The 7900 XT offers 1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, and 1x USB Type-C, which supports newer displays and higher refresh rates. Both use PCIe 4.0 x16. API support differs only in DirectX version: 12_1 for the 5700 XT, 12 Ultimate (12_2) for the 7900 XT; OpenGL is the same at 4.6, and Vulkan is the same at 1.4.

Release dates are far apart: the 5700 XT launched on 2019-07-06, and the 7900 XT on 2022-11-02. The 5700 XT's predecessor is Vega and its successor is Navi II, while the 7900 XT's predecessor is Navi II and its successor is Navi IV. Both are end-of-life. The launch MSRP for the 5700 XT was 399 USD, and for the 7900 XT it was 899 USD, as the database records.