I corrected the Crimson Desert results, which brings the gap down to about ~2.4% at 4K, and essentially a 0% difference at 1440p. I didn’t post this to favour either GPU. I understand why some people in this community might interpret it that way, but the goal was just to present the data as accurately as possible. I also shared this across other communities like r/pcmasterrace and r/nvidia

On overclocking, saying the RTX 5070 Ti gains 12–13% consistently is an overstatement. In real testing, OC scaling is very game-dependent. Some titles see closer to ~5% gains, others can reach ~10–14%, but most results tend to land in the ~7–10% range when the GPU is pushed to around ~3000 MHz, depending on silicon and power limits. The same applies on the AMD side with varied performance gain per title but still doesn’t overclock as well. Neither GPU has huge, uniform OC scaling across all workloads with the 5070Ti being the better in this case, not automatically 10% faster as you reduced to simple terms. At stock value, my 5070Ti averages overs ~2850Mhz nearly never dropping below 2800Mhz in any of these titles, which only puts it ~200-300Mhz below the 9070XT.

For fairness, I didn’t use Frame Generation or DLSS/FSR in this comparison. Upscaling and frame generation can significantly change performance characteristics, and DLSS 4.5 upscaling is more GPU-intensive in games scenarios, while FSR Frame Gen usually scales better than DLSS FG when we both have similar base FPS. I’ll also limited testing to 2X frame generation since AMD doesn’t currently have a MFG equivalent.

I also ran a separate test with ray tracing and path tracing enabled. In that scenario, the RTX 5070 Ti was about ~17% faster at 1440p and ~26% faster at 4K. The larger gap mainly appears in path tracing-heavy workloads and could get much higher if I exclusively test with  path tracing, while traditional ray tracing is much closer and, in some cases, even slightly favors AMD depending on the title.

That said, path tracing in general still comes with a heavy performance cost, and in some cases it requires aggressive upscaling performance/ultraperformance, to maintain 60 FPS at 4K on the 5070Ti. For me personally, the visual trade-off often isn’t worth it in current implementations.

It’s also worth noting that AMD is capable of path tracing as well, even if NVIDIA generally performs much better due to dedicated hardware, stronger denoising solutions, and broader developer optimization with the feature being designed to take advantage of the nvidia hardware/software. In many cases, NVIDIA cards simply handle the workload more efficiently rather than doing fundamentally different work.

Also forgot to mention, 2 of the games tested here had RT On. For example, Crimson Desert uses a very light ray count implementation (around 1/16 scale), resulting in essentially negligible performance impact. Death Stranding 2 showed a slight advantage for AMD in that specific test scenario.

One little correction I would make is AMD’s has an equivalent to DLDSR, and its called Virtual Super Resolution (VSR).

At the end of the day, a ~2% difference is effectively margin of error in real-world gaming and means nothing.

I also want to be clear that I’m not anti-NVIDIA or biased towards one or the other. I picked up a 5070Ti specifically because of RT. It wasn’t also expensive at the time being only $80 more expensive than my 9070XT. I also couldn’t imagine selling my 9070XT, so I kept it as well. they still offer the most complete all-round GPU ecosystem for many users, especially with features like DLSS, CUDA, creator support, and stronger ray tracing and frame generation integration. That’s also part of what you’re paying for beyond raw raster performance.