Discussion RDNA4 + CDNA3 Architectures Thread

[DisEnchantment]

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

 

[exquisitechar]

How low does AMD have to go?

Tons of people would rather get a regular 5070 even if the 9070XT was $549, unfortunately.

 

[adroc_thurston]

How low does AMD have to go?

Low enough to force Nvidia price cuts.

 

[gaav87]

Well if its the price than super platinum top aib are ~3700-3800pln personally im ok with that but most ppl wont buy if 5070ti and 5070 will be in stock so mss down the drain xD

 

[ToTTenTranz]

In EU that's over 950€ for the XT with VAT (just about anywhere).

You're putting VAT over the UK's prices that already have VAT?

I'm not sure we should count additional VAT over USA's prices, considering the latter may already have Trump's tariffs included (it wouldn't be very smart for them not to).

If that's the case, we should be looking at pre-tax prices of $500 and $590 for the 9070 and 9070XT. Which would translate to 600-620€ and 720-730€ respectively, in euroland.

 

[GTracing]

Tons of people would rather get a regular 5070 even if the 9070XT was $549, unfortunately.

Yeah, and that's kind of my point. A $650 9070 XT is around 9% better performance/dollar in raster and 7% worse performance/dollar in ray tracing compared to the 5070 ti. At that point, if someone isn't considering AMD then I assume they are just a walking embodiment of the "I want AMD to lower prices so I can get Nvidia for cheaper" joke.

 

[adroc_thurston]

they are just a walking embodiment of the "I want AMD to lower prices so I can get Nvidia for cheaper" joke.

It's not a joke.
That's what the market wants.

 

[MrTeal]

Yeah, and that's kind of my point. A $650 9070 XT is around 9% better performance/dollar in raster and 7% worse performance/dollar in ray tracing compared to the 5070 ti. At that point, if someone isn't considering AMD then I assume they are just a walking embodiment of the "I want AMD to lower prices so I can get Nvidia for cheaper" joke.

We'll have to see how things go in actual 3rd party benchmark suites. I really want AMD to succeed and would love to see them pull back to the 30-40% market share position where they can viably compete long term. That being said, at 9% better raster/$ and and 7% worse RT/$, I'd barely consider AMD. Like it or not Nvidia's software stack is just better than AMD's, and they hold their value better than AMD by a mile. That's not even Nvidia - $50; if they price it where they win raster by a small amount and lose RT by an equal amount they have nothing at all as a value proposition other than "You don't need to give Nvidia your money"

 

[blckgrffn]

We'll have to see how things go in actual 3rd party benchmark suites. I really want AMD to succeed and would love to see them pull back to the 30-40% market share position where they can viably compete long term. That being said, at 9% better raster/$ and and 7% worse RT/$, I'd barely consider AMD. Like it or not Nvidia's software stack is just better than AMD's, and they hold their value better than AMD by a mile. That's not even Nvidia - $50; if they price it where they win raster by a small amount and lose RT by an equal amount they have nothing at all as a value proposition other than "You don't need to give Nvidia your money"

I mean... is it though? For games? DLSS has broader adoption at this point, but AMD drivers and their whole adrenaline suite are pretty solid when it comes to games, gaming overlays, tweaking power, tweaking clock speeds, capping FPS, framegen, etc. There is the nvidia app but if anything the adrenaline suite is most established, feature rich and in my limited experience stable.

Cuda, etc. Obviously.

Whether they hold their value better - it seems so, I think that is true although right now its all bonkers. It's certainly easier to sell a PC with an RTX GPU, but its honestly come a long way and lots of people seem to focus on it "does it game my game" when I talk with them.

Used card prices are in a weird spot. A 2080 Super is less than a 3060 12GB because the market is tired of those, I guess. So resale hinges more on framebuffer than in recent memory now than before.

 

[Gideon]

You're putting VAT over the UK's prices that already have VAT?

Actually I'm not, the exchange rate is just that high:

Google Search

I was going to ask for last minute guesses. I'm sticking with $550/650.

That's the price that makes the most sense (and I hope thst's what they go for, even when its MSFP).

Anything above that is bound to trigger negativity (too close to nvidia's MSFP) anything below is closer to 20% margins than AMD's "holy grail", 50%.

I wouldn't mind less, I just don't seem it's likely (in fact I'm afraid AMD will ask a lot more)

 

[GTracing]

We'll have to see how things go in actual 3rd party benchmark suites. I really want AMD to succeed and would love to see them pull back to the 30-40% market share position where they can viably compete long term. That being said, at 9% better raster/$ and and 7% worse RT/$, I'd barely consider AMD. Like it or not Nvidia's software stack is just better than AMD's, and they hold their value better than AMD by a mile. That's not even Nvidia - $50; if they price it where they win raster by a small amount and lose RT by an equal amount they have nothing at all as a value proposition other than "You don't need to give Nvidia your money"

The thing is raster performance is still much more important than RT performance for the average person. Most games dont have ray tracing. Some games that do have ray tracing run at unacceptably low framerates with it on. These also tend to be the games where Nvidia has the biggest lead. And Ray tracing is the first thing you should turn off to get better FPS.

The Nvidia -$50 meme has always been with roughly equal raster performance and much worse ray tracing performance. The 6800 XT was $50 cheaper and 5% slower in raster.

If you won't consider AMD even when they have better perf/dollar, then why are you on this subforum?

 

[gaav87]

Actually I'm not, the exchange rate is just that high:

Google Search

That's the price that makes the most sense (and I hope thst's what they go for, even when its MSFP).

Anything above that is bound to trigger negativity (too close to nvidia's MSFP) anything below is closer to 20% margins than AMD's "holy grail", 50%.

I wouldn't mind less, I just don't seem it's likely (in fact I'm afraid AMD will ask a lot more)

So u think the bom is 325$ ?

 

[SolidQ]

Another price rumor

 

[adroc_thurston]

why are you on this subforum?

He wants NV pricecuts.

 

[Hail The Brain Slug]

Another price rumor

This has got to be a mistake, they must have meant the price of the 7900GRE was $549 before. There is no price for the 9070 yet, just like the 9070XT.

 

[MrTeal]

The thing is raster performance is still much more important than RT performance for the average person. Most games dont have ray tracing. Some games that do have ray tracing run at unacceptably low framerates with it on. These also tend to be the games where Nvidia has the biggest lead. And Ray tracing is the first thing you should turn off to get better FPS.

The Nvidia -$50 meme has always been with roughly equal raster performance and much worse ray tracing performance. The 6800 XT was $50 cheaper and 5% slower in raster.

If you won't consider AMD even when they have better perf/dollar, then why are you on this subforum?

Right, and that obviously hasn't worked out well for them. I'm not sure where the numbers given came from, but I'm guess it's assuming the 9070 XT is a 5-6% slower than the 5070 Ti at raster, quite a bit slower at RT and $100 cheaper. No VRAM advantage like RDNA2 had, Nvidia is generally better supported by professional software, and when I go to sell it in a couple/few years I'll probably get $100 more than the 9070 XT used and it'll be on the market 1 or 2 days instead a weeks.

 

[gaav87]

This has got to be a mistake, they must have meant the price of the 7900GRE was $549 before. There is no price for the 9070 yet, just like the 9070XT.

9070xt 350mm2 16gb 649$
B580 272mm2 12gb 249$

Guess the extra 8$ of vram and 78mm2 of n4 costs this much xD
Lets assume intel is at 10% gross margin... that would put 9070xt at 50%-60% gross margin.
They also want some of that huangbuck.

 

[gdansk]

I'll probably get $100 more than the 9070 XT

Isn't that the same difference as you paid for it?' I'm not seeing that as an advantage.

 

[Josh128]

Whatever the price will be, the shills will be ready for any sort of discount anyway, you can already see the 'beyond WCCF' guy gaslighting the X crowd with 'why don't anyone talk about DLSS4' (as if it's not the main thrust of nvidia marketing this gen)

He’s been whining about the transformer model for a few weeks now.

 

[Saylick]

Isn't that the same difference as you paid for it?' I'm not seeing that as an advantage.

That's also assuming the 5070 Ti was bought at MSRP.

 

[jpiniero]

Lets assume intel is at 10% gross margin...

More like negative...

 

[SolidQ]

they must have meant the price of the 7900GRE was $549 before

or AMD was thinking about 550 for 9070. I wouldn't surpise if AMD repeat same mistake like 7700XT/7800Xt 50$ difference

 

[adroc_thurston]

That's also assuming the 5070 Ti was bought at MSRP.

It will be somewhere there after NV ramps up the supply.

 

[gdansk]

I have read enough. Sentiment analysis indicates there is no price that would make gamers happy to buy a 9070 XT. Some would begrudgingly buy it if it was $500 and Nvidia didn't cut prices or enforce closer to MSRP prices. But they still wouldn't be happy about it.

 

[adroc_thurston]

I have read enough. Sentiment analysis indicates there is no price that would make gamers happy to buy a 9070 XT. Some would begrudgingly buy it if it was $500 and Nvidia didn't cut prices or enforce closer to MSRP prices. But they still wouldn't be happy about it.

Bingo.
It's not a game AMD can win without a chungus.

 

[gaav87]

300mm2 N4 wafer 90% yield 15.5K$ -
155 total GPU dies (13x27mm -350mm2)
98 dies (full spec) 9070 xt with 64CU -110$
42 dies (cut-down from defects) 9070 non-xt 56CU -110$
15 dies scrap

N48 die - 110$
Packaging N4 FC-BGA - 30$
Binning and Sorting: 10$
16GB GDDR6 20Gbps VRAM: 40$
PCB and Minor Components (VRM, HDMI, Cooling, pcb, capacitor resistors ics...) 60$
testing the assembled: 10$
Surface-mount assembly: 5$
Logistics: 3$
manufacturing overhead: 5$
Margin for Errors: 5%

N48 cost:
(110+30+10+40+60+10+5+3+5)*1.05 = max 286,6$ / min 251$ (with overhead)

IF 251$ and 50% Gross profit margin = $502
IF 286,6$ and 50% gross profit margin = $573,20

Feel free to point out mistakes.
Thank you come again.