Discussion RDNA4 + CDNA3 Architectures Thread

DisEnchantment · Mar 23, 2022

With the GFX940 patches in full swing since first week of March, it is looking like MI300 is not far in the distant future!
Usually AMD takes around 3Qs to get the support in LLVM and amdgpu. Lately, since RDNA2 the window they push to add support for new devices is much reduced to prevent leaks.
But looking at the flurry of code in LLVM, it is a lot of commits. Maybe because US Govt is starting to prepare the SW environment for El Capitan (Maybe to avoid slow bring up situation like Frontier for example)

See here for the GFX940 specific commits

History for llvm/lib/Target/AMDGPU - llvm/llvm-project

The LLVM Project is a collection of modular and reusable compiler and toolchain technologies. - History for llvm/lib/Target/AMDGPU - llvm/llvm-project

github.com

Or Phoronix

More AMD "GFX940" Enablement Work Landing In LLVM - Phoronix

www.phoronix.com

There is a lot more if you know whom to follow in LLVM review chains (before getting merged to github), but I am not going to link AMD employees.

I am starting to think MI300 will launch around the same time like Hopper probably only a couple of months later!
Although I believe Hopper had problems not having a host CPU capable of doing PCIe 5 in the very near future therefore it might have gotten pushed back a bit until SPR and Genoa arrives later in 2022.
If PVC slips again I believe MI300 could launch before it

This is nuts, MI100/200/300 cadence is impressive.

Previous thread on CDNA2 and RDNA3 here

Question - Speculation: RDNA3 + CDNA2 Architectures Thread

Man I have been dying to make this one for a while now. First rumours for RDNA3 are here so new thread time! Just going to start off with this one for now: kopite7kimi on Twitter: "@VideoCardz Ah, I mean a simple mcm design with 10240 cores is not enough. Because the lift from RDNA2 to RDNA3...

forums.anandtech.com

blackangus · Friday at 4:29 PM

Win2012R2 said:
A small amount of cards (likely not even 10%) were at MSRP as declared by AMD, which makes MSRP as declared by AMD - fake, which is what I said.

Just because AIBs had inflated AMD's MSRP and sold it at exactly their own MSRP does not mean that AMD's MSRP was not fake - it was.

So cards were available at MSRP.... but.... the MSRP was fake.
They never said 100% of cards would be available at 599$.
They never said AIB's wont sell enhanced cards above 599$
Therefore cards were available at MSRP, and it wasn't fake.
Just for discussion sake... what % of cards would make the MSRP not fake?

Win2012R2 said:
I am focusing on what they said, and the fact that they failed to mention that 40-50% aspiration is by (for example) 2030 is on them deceiving with their statements.

No its not deceptive. Its a goal. You are reading in anything else, that is your assumption when nothing was mentioned about a timeline.
And example of deceptive would: The 5070 is a 550$ with 4090 performance.

Win2012R2 said:
Therefore IF AMD actually had real intention to work towards their declared market share goal then they would have made a LOT of cards for launch - like at least 1 million, which incidentally is just around 10% dGPUs sold PER QUARTER. They'd have to make 2-3 mln for launch if they were really serious, and sell it at real MSRP - and that stuff (9070 XT) would have sold!

Why do you think they would ever forecast the need for 1 million cards at launch?

You seem to have an assumption that if they made it they would sell it, which is a huge assumption on its own.
Then you make an assumption that somehow they could have foreseen this in time to make the cards.
Then you make an assumption that their parts could have ramped to that volume.
Then you make an assumption that excess inventory is ok, its not the market doesn't like carried costs its wasted money.
Then you make an assumption that they could book TSMC time immediately.
Then you make an assumption that budget is available for this.

I can go on but I wont.

maddie · Friday at 5:24 PM

blackangus said:
Why do you think they would ever forecast the need for 1 million cards at launch?

You seem to have an assumption that if they made it they would sell it, which is a huge assumption on its own.
Then you make an assumption that somehow they could have foreseen this in time to make the cards.
Then you make an assumption that their parts could have ramped to that volume.
Then you make an assumption that excess inventory is ok, its not the market doesn't like carried costs its wasted money.
Then you make an assumption that they could book TSMC time immediately.
Then you make an assumption that budget is available for this.

I can go on but I wont.

I'll add one.

The 60 series will sell more than the 70 series and is launching soon How many cards of those were produced?

Shmee · Friday at 8:19 PM

DAPUNISHER said:
Make no mistake, AMD has a winner in RDNA 4.

Nvidia shills are losing the propaganda war this round. On Reddit I see them getting sent to downvote hell for pushing bad talking points. The bad drivers talking point that was the bread and butter for so long backfires spectacularly now.

There is no image management or counter argument that is going to change gamers minds about vram. Green brought nothing in the way of bang for buck this round, and cheesed on vram again. No amount of loserbenchmark rhetoric is going to convince gamers otherwise.

The worst shill tactic I've read there, is fake Radeon owners claiming if their RDNA 3 card does not get FSR 4 they are never buying AMD again. 🤣 Nvidia leaves owners behind on features almost every gen. But if AMD does it just once, they are switching to the company that does it habitually. GTFO with your faux outrage. Remember how they roasted AMD for making FSR non proprietary? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

I agree, that RDNA4 is the obvious winner this generation, especially with how many they have sold compared to the competition, and obvious superior bang for the buck value. I will caution that if we can push back on AMD, to encourage FSR4 support on older cards, this is something we as gamers should do. Just because a company is doing well, does not mean that they are perfect, or that they can't do better.

Remember it took a fair bit to get Zen 3 support on older AM4 boards, but in the end the gamers' requests won out, and AMD provided it due to public demand.

GaiaHunter · Saturday at 2:00 AM

Win2012R2 said:
Pre-Order early?

It's not like it takes 3 months to make a new chip.

The answer to AMDs reluctance is obvious of course - much higher profit margins for using 4nm to make EPYC chiplets, GPUs is just big risk to be humiliated yet again by Nvidia, lose money on depreciating non-competitive overstock, lose opportunity to make extra money via EPYC, so it's no brainer from their point of view - only use capacity that they can't sell for higher margin. It makes sense on greed level, but strategically terrible choice to continue making.

So AMD could have sneaked in and book more allocation away from Apple and NVIDIA?

You might as well say the fault is TSMC not predicting demand and not building enough Fabs...
Imagine the profit TSMC could make had double the wafers - AMD could go now and order a few extra million GPU wafers unless NVIDIA booked them to make extra AI accelerators...

beginner99 · Saturday at 5:52 AM

Win2012R2 said:
Nah, wait for proper 9070 XT! It's a no brainer - worth waiting for.

I have waited a very long time already but then I also don't really necessarily need the 9070 xt. right now it seems prices are coming down, I could get a 9070 for $680. cheapest somewhat available 9070 xt are at least $130 more. this is with VAT. MSRP with VAT here for a 9070 would be $600 so it's not that far off from US msrp and cpus and gpus here in europe are almost always more expensive than US. SO best case is I wait 2 month and save $80.

ToTTenTranz · Saturday at 2:26 PM

Win2012R2 said:
Better margin per chip = order more wafers

No, wafers aren't infinite. They're pretty scarce with TSMC being the only one with profitable 5nm and 3nm fabs.

jpiniero · Saturday at 4:19 PM

GaiaHunter said:
You might as well say the fault is TSMC not predicting demand and not building enough Fabs...

TSMC is actually doing some conversion of N5 fabs to N3...

HutchinsonJC · Saturday at 6:14 PM

Shmee said:
Shmee said:

I will caution that if we can push back on AMD, to encourage FSR4 support on older cards, this is something we as gamers should do.

Click to expand...

Recently I read up on the PS5Pro announcement of improving PSSR and the whole Amethyst Project, and my understanding is that even there, where they sort of dub it RDNA3.5, it's not quite enough hardware to do an exact FSR4 implementation, that they have to do some modification to get something close to FSR4 to work, which should be available in 2026.

I'm pretty sure RDNA3 has less hardware to fully support FSR4 than the way the announcement read for the RDNA 3.5 variant in the PS5Pro.

Edit: Not sure what I did on the quote, but I pulled my words out of the quote tags. Still messed up, but oh well.

adroc_thurston · Saturday at 7:08 PM

HutchinsonJC said:
I'm pretty sure RDNA3 has less hardware to fully support FSR4 than the way the announcement read for the RDNA 3.5 variant in the PS5Pro.

it just doesn't have FP8.

techjunkie123 · Saturday at 8:35 PM

SFF build with 9700X and 9070XT. I could only get the steel legend white one so decided to go all white for the build.

Vikv1918 · Sunday at 2:09 AM

Why no news on 9070 XT laptops? At 150W it has the same performance as Laptop RTX 4090. Put it in a $1200 laptop it would be an excellent competitor to the upcoming RTX 5070/5080/5090 Laptops

adroc_thurston · Sunday at 2:28 AM

Vikv1918 said:
Why no news on 9070 XT laptops

They do not exist.

Vikv1918 said:
At 150W it has the same performance as Laptop RTX 4090. Put it in a $1200 laptop it would be an excellent competitor to the upcoming RTX 5070/5080/5090 Laptops

None of that matters.

igor_kavinski · Sunday at 3:04 AM

AMD loves corporate money more. I think it's also more "stable" money because 5 years later, the same corporation may buy new hardware from AMD again but consumer may keep the hardware for ten years or even switch to a competitor when there's a decent price difference or even get duped by the competitor's marketing.

Mopetar · Sunday at 11:02 AM

The almost complete and utter lack of AMD GPUs in laptops calls to question your premise.

I suppose that hanging around 0 does meet the definition of "stable" money though.

gdansk · Sunday at 11:07 AM

igor_kavinski said:
AMD loves corporate money more. I think it's also more "stable" money because 5 years later, the same corporation may buy new hardware from AMD again but consumer may keep the hardware for ten years or even switch to a competitor when there's a decent price difference or even get duped by the competitor's marketing.

Laptops are where the corporate money is. The reason Navi 48 is not in laptops has little to do with AMD's preferences. Radeon simply does not sell well in laptops and none of the OEMs want it. They'd have to give Intel Moorefield-level rebates to OEMs to get them to ship it. And then what's the point of selling GPUs for under cost? At least with CPUs Intel had a theory of getting x86 everywhere.

Vikv1918 · Sunday at 11:47 AM

adroc_thurston said:
They do not exist.

None of that matters.

I get why Lenovo or Dell or HP don't want a $1200-$1500 Radeon laptop to compete with their own $2000-$3000 80/90 series nvidia lapops. But I wonder why AMD doesn't approach some 2nd tier Chinese company to start making dGPU gaming laptops, instead of simply allowing the big 4 to sabotage their laptop GPU hopes forever.

gdansk said:
Laptops are where the corporate money is. The reason Navi 48 is not in laptops has little to do with AMD's preferences. Radeon simply does not sell well in laptops and none of the OEMs want it. They'd have to give Intel Moorefield-level rebates to OEMs to get them to ship it. And then what's the point of selling GPUs for under cost? At least with CPUs Intel had a theory of getting x86 everywhere.

But wouldn't the fact that "Radeon doesn not sell well" matters only if Radeon laptops were an entirely new product line that requires tons of fixed cost and therefore a large minimum number of laptops to be sold. But they're not. It doesn't cost much more to make the same laptop but with a Radeon GPU instead of nvidia.

But "none of the OEMs want it" is absolutely correct, and it's not because of consumer preferences, but the OEMs own desire not to allow competition with their own existing products. They are perfectly happy with the current status quo of $2000-$3000 green laptops with mid-range desktop dGPUs attached to them. Consumers aren't happy (or simply don't care because they know no alternative), but the OEMs are VERY happy.

Of course the solution to this that people often give is the completely unfair and unlikely idea that AMD needs to become so competitive and so good that OEMs are simply forced to start making Radeon laptops, like what happened with Ryzen laptops.

But also, AMD themselves seem completely disinterested in actually selling laptops in volume. There is quite simply no Radeon alternatives to the $700 4050 or $900 4060 or $1100 4070 laptops in the market. There are only a few "AMD Advantage" laptops that are extremely overpriced and make no sense to buy, and usually aren't available to purchase in most markets anyway.

AMD's OEM strategy seems to be miniPCs or high-priced Strix Halos or handhelds. But they are completely ignoring the mass-market gaming laptop market which is now 50% of all dGPUs sold. Are they scared of retaliation from the big 4 or something?

igor_kavinski · Sunday at 12:20 PM

AMD could contract a company like Foxconn (or cheaper one) to make AMD branded gaming laptops. Maybe sell a million of them through their website, WORLDWIDE. None of the current crap where their shop doesn't even show up for unsupported countries. Once that generates enough interest among the populace, the OEMs will smell the money and come running to AMD for a deal.

I will re-iterate that AMD does not like the consumer that much anymore and not interested in increasing their marketshare beyond what they have accomplished already. They have done nothing against the scalping of X3D CPUs and 9070 XT/non-XT in worldwide markets. It may be a whole year before I see the 9950X3D available in my region at an affordable price.

9800X3D is selling for $582 which is actually discounted as shopkeepers are unable to sell them for $815 that they tried to grab from consumers at launch. Now that price has been slapped on the 9900X3D and 9950X3D is out of stock after being sold for $1000+ and currently only available at just one shop for $1358. RX 9070 is selling for more than 9070 XT MSRP.

Even when Intel is down on their luck and Nvidia is having their worst launches in history, AMD feels like being complacent and just doing the bare minimum for the consumer market. They don't realize that the distributors are doing irreparable damage to their brand. So anyone who says that AMD is not "corporate friendly", is just lucky to live in a place where they are not scalped to the gills.

TESKATLIPOKA · Sunday at 12:46 PM

Vikv1918 said:
Why no news on 9070 XT laptops? At 150W it has the same performance as Laptop RTX 4090. Put it in a $1200 laptop it would be an excellent competitor to the upcoming RTX 5070/5080/5090 Laptops

A laptop with 9070XT would never cost only $1200, that's simply pure fantasy.

adroc_thurston · Sunday at 12:58 PM

Vikv1918 said:
I get why Lenovo or Dell or HP don't want a $1200-$1500 Radeon laptop to compete with their own $2000-$3000 80/90 series nvidia lapops

Not the reason either.

beginner99 · Sunday at 1:27 PM

gdansk said:
Laptops are where the corporate money is

While true corporate laptops are probably like 99.99% shipped with an iGPU only. So that segemnt for laptop dGPU is tiny.

jpiniero · Sunday at 2:09 PM

beginner99 said:
While true corporate laptops are probably like 99.99% shipped with an iGPU only. So that segemnt for laptop dGPU is tiny.

Gaming laptops might be the one place where Non-Apple laptops have had some success over $1k though. But we are talking only so much.

In2Photos · Sunday at 2:28 PM

Didn't AMD just announce that Dell will be offering AMD now? That shows some willingness to go against the grain. And if Nvidia can't deliver chips this generation it may prompt the Dell and HP brass to consider an alternative.

adroc_thurston · Sunday at 3:08 PM

In2Photos said:
And if Nvidia can't deliver chips this generation it may prompt the Dell and HP brass to consider an alternative.

lmao no, people want the green sticker.

In2Photos · Sunday at 4:24 PM

adroc_thurston said:
lmao no, people want the green sticker.

People wanted the Intel inside sticker too. 😏

HuesToo4 · Sunday at 5:52 PM

In2Photos said:
People wanted the Intel inside sticker too. 😏

To be honest AMD is not at a point yet where regular non-tech savvy people are specifically looking for Ryzen stickers, partly because Intel still dominates OEMs.

Discussion RDNA4 + CDNA3 Architectures Thread

Golden Member

Senior member

Diamond Member

Memory & Storage, Graphics Cards Mod Elite Member

Diamond Member

Diamond Member

Senior member

Lifer

Senior member

Diamond Member

Member

Junior Member

Diamond Member

Lifer

Diamond Member

Diamond Member

Junior Member

Lifer

Platinum Member

Diamond Member

Diamond Member

Lifer

Platinum Member

Diamond Member

Platinum Member

Member