{"id":264428,"date":"2025-11-10T21:43:53","date_gmt":"2025-11-10T20:43:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.hwcooling.net\/?p=264428\/"},"modified":"2025-11-10T22:35:12","modified_gmt":"2025-11-10T21:35:12","slug":"radeon-rx-9070-xt-samsung-or-hynix-gddr6-performance-test","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.hwcooling.net\/en\/radeon-rx-9070-xt-samsung-or-hynix-gddr6-performance-test\/","title":{"rendered":"Radeon RX 9070 XT: Samsung or Hynix? GDDR6 performance test"},"content":{"rendered":"

I already compared the clocks, temperatures, and power consumption of two samples of the same model, the Gigabyte AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT Gaming OC. They differed in memory\u2014the first had Hynix GDDR6 chips and the second Samsung. However, the two tests were months apart. Now I have both units on hand, so I can test performance under identical conditions. We’ll also look at the impact of enabling the fast memory timing option.<\/p>\n

In the previous article, I focused primarily on operating characteristics, as it’s known that cards with Samsung chips have significantly lower temperatures, leading to the common belief that they generate less heat and have lower power consumption. However, a detailed comparison of operating characteristics<\/a> quite convincingly debunked this.<\/p>\n

But I couldn’t properly compare whether the memory used also has any impact on performance. I did test the newer card with Samsung chips on the same drivers as the RX 9070 XT with Hynix chips at launch, but between the two tests, there were necessary motherboard BIOS updates, updates to software and games used for testing, and even the operating system received updates.<\/p>\n

However, I arranged with Gigabyte to borrow the card with Hynix chips again, so today we can compare both cards under the same conditions with current drivers.<\/p>\n

To start, let’s recap the reference specifications for the RX 9070 XT:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

I won’t reintroduce the Gigabyte AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT Gaming OC itself in detail, as it was covered thoroughly in the initial review.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

The card features a dual BIOS. You can switch between Performance and Silent modes. They differ only in the fan control curve settings. We will compare both cards in Silent mode.<\/p>\n

The “Gaming OC” suffix indicates this is a factory-overclocked model. The boost clock is increased from the reference 2970 MHz to 3060 MHz. The stated typical game clock is raised from 2400 MHz to 2520 MHz. Actual GPU clock speeds during gaming tests are higher than the stated clocks. Along with the clock speed increases over reference, Gigabyte also raised the Total Board Power (TBP) limit from the reference 304 W to 330 W.<\/p>\n

The data that can be pulled via GPU-Z for the card with Hynix chips is shown in the screenshots below.<\/p>\n


\n\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

And this is what a card with Samsung chips looks like:<\/p>\n


\n\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

The memory from both Hynix and Samsung have the same clock speeds. What we cannot see, however, are their timing, which can influence performance. Therefore, we will compare them across a range of tests with varying demands on performance and memory bandwidth, and we will also test whether enabling the Fast Timing setting for memory in the AMD Software control panel has any effect.<\/p>\n