Best Buy (US big-box) RDNA4 consumer discrete GPU channel

Gigabyte Radeon RX 9070 XT Gaming OC 16GB GDDR6 PCIe 5.0 bare card, SKU 6617866, Best Buy, pre-tax, observed 2026-10-03. Peer listing XFX Swift RX 9070 XT 16GB at $909.99, with a third at $929.99 PERISHABLE-FIGURE STAMP (added 2026-10-04, uniform across data/supply/ so it is greppable). PRICE CLASS: ASKING price captured from a live listing or product page - the price at which a seller advertises the item right now. NOT a sold/completed transaction price, NOT an auction result and NOT a dealer cost; for used or refurbished parts the gap between ask and realised is typically wide. OBSERVED: 2026-10-03 RE-VERIFY BY: 2027-01-04 - the repo's quarterly re-verification bar. After that date this figure is presumed drifted and must be re-checked against its source before it is quoted again. A price without its observation date is noise; this stamp exists so a reader can tell a fresh figure from a stale one without reading prose. UNIT: Gigabyte Radeon RX 9070 XT Gaming OC 16GB GDDR6 PCIe 5.0 bare card, SKU 6617866, Best Buy, pre-tax, observed 2026-10-03 READING RULE: No further perishable flag is published for this figure.

NEGATIVE, DELIBERATELY NOT STRUCTURAL: no lead time in weeks is printed for these SKUs. It is not that no vendor in the chain publishes one - CDW does, and it is recorded on cdw-enterprise as 'published' - but this channel routes to 'request a quote' or shows a stock count instead, so the number exists elsewhere in the market and is not surfaced here. Checked 2026-10-04 per source spl-negative-no-oem-publishes-lead-time.

EAR 3A001 or EAR99 (below the 3A090.a TPP / performance-density thresholds) + EAR 744.23 (Entity List) + EAR 744.6 (Unverified / MEU lists)

MECHANISM: the part falls BELOW the ECCN 3A090.a/.b TPP and performance-density thresholds, so the advanced-computing licence regime, its case-by-case China/Macau carve-out and its D:5 screening do NOT attach. What remains is the general EAR plus destination-country import rules and screening of the consignee and its ultimate parent against the Entity, Unverified and MEU lists. NO LICENCE REQUIRED for the sale itself; the screening is a party-listing check, not a performance-threshold check. The binding ECCN determination for any specific part is the exporter's own classification, not this record.

Scoped to what this channel actually stocks: RDNA4 consumer boards, with 'Add to cart' live on both SKUs. Two negative findings are the reason this record is narrow and its accelerator_ids list is deliberately thin. First, there is no accelerator record in this repo for the Radeon RX 9070 XT, so that part is described here but cannot be referenced as an id - a supply record is not the place to create one. Second, Best Buy returned no RTX 3090 and no RTX 4090 SKU on these consumer-GPU searches, and its B580 search returned only facet metadata with no priced product, so this retailer is not a viable channel for GeForce or for Arc. The $869.99-$929.99 band lines up closely with B&H's ASUS Prime RX 9070 XT OC at $829.99 and the GIGABYTE board from EUR 757.16 on Geizhals, so RDNA4 pricing is consistent across US retail and the EU. EXPORT CONTROL (2026-10-04, mechanism-level; source spl-eccn-3a090-ccl): consumer gaming cards of this generation generally do NOT meet the 3A090.a TPP/performance-density parameters and fall under ECCN 3A001 or are designated EAR99, i.e. the advanced-computing licence regime with its case-by-case and D:5 screening does not attach to them. This is exactly what makes export status a PER-PART property rather than a per-vendor one: a GeForce RTX 5090 and a datacenter/professional part from the same vendor and the same process generation can carry entirely different control status. Recorded as false for that reason, NOT because the part is unregulated - it remains subject to the EAR generally, to destination-country import rules, and to screening of the consignee and its ultimate parent against the Entity, Unverified and MEU lists (15 CFR part 744). The binding ECCN determination for any specific SKU is the exporter's own classification, which no public vendor page states. Same reasoning applies to this AMD consumer board: consumer discrete graphics parts of this class do not meet 3A090 TPP/performance-density parameters, so they fall under 3A001 or EAR99 rather than the advanced-computing regime. LEAD TIME: null, and deliberately so. A marketplace or big-box reseller publishes STOCK STATE, not a lead time - where this record shows in-stock that means the listing was available on the observation date, and where it shows backorder no week window is published at all. Converting one into the other would be an invention. The one exception in the whole chain is CDW, which does print windows (source spl-cdw-published-lead-times-gpu-2026-10); note that even there the scarcest SKUs - the RTX PRO 6000 96GB cards and DGX Spark - read 'Item Backordered' with NO estimate, so scarcity and lead time are inversely related in what distributors actually publish. Probe log in source spl-negative-no-oem-publishes-lead-time. ACCELERATOR LINK CORRECTED 2026-10-04. accelerator_ids was empty on the strength of a note claiming 'there is no accelerator record in this repo for the Radeon RX 9070 XT'. That claim is now FALSE: the record [[accelerators/amd-radeon-rx-9070-xt]] exists (AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT, 16GB, rdna4 / Navi 48 gfx1201, status verified, sources acc-fill-amd-radeon-rx-9070xt-product-page and acc-fill-amd-rdna-architecture-page). Either the accelerator record was created after this supply record was written, or the supply-side check was run before it existed; either way the empty list was a stale negative rather than a true one, and the priced part ($869.99 Gigabyte RX 9070 XT Gaming OC 16GB, SKU 6617866; XFX Swift $909.99) is exactly that card. Linked now. CONSEQUENCE WORTH KEEPING: an empty accelerator_ids field is ambiguous in this schema - it can mean 'no accelerator record exists', 'the channel carries something we cannot yet reference', or 'deliberately not a hardware channel' - and those are very different states for a query to hit. Readers should not treat an empty list as evidence of absence without reading notes.