[Rumor, Tweaktown] AMD to launch next-gen Navi graphics cards at E3

[lifeblood]

And now it appears that there might... not be RX 5600 series... Only 5500.
...
1536 ALUs, 128 bit GDDR6, 4/8 GB(does not matter to me) for 249$, with performance equal to GTX 1660 Ti, but more efficient. That is all Im asking for.

I still expect there will be a 5600 series, maybe just not on October 7. Everything points to the 5500 being an RX 560 replacement. The 580/570 cards will still need to be replaced. I suspect they’re not releasing the 5600 series yet because the 580/570 cards are still selling so well. The 570 4Gb in particular has been a price/performance champ.

Regardless of what AMD releases and when, I’ve given myself a dead line of Black Friday for a new card. Unless AMD puts a worthy competitor on the table for at most $250, I’m getting the 1660 Ti. My little RX 570 has been doing an admirable job but it’s starting to stutter on my new Ultra-wide Freesync monitor.

 

[mohit9206]

Amd needs worthy alternatives to 570 and 580, amd caught the lightning in the bottle with these two cards and knowing history of AMD, i don't think they will be able to pull it off again, but let's hope I'm wrong.

 

[Glo.]

Regardless of what AMD releases and when, I’ve given myself a dead line of Black Friday for a new card. Unless AMD puts a worthy competitor on the table for at most $250, I’m getting the 1660 Ti. My little RX 570 has been doing an admirable job but it’s starting to stutter on my new Ultra-wide Freesync monitor.

The problem with this is this. Even at 1408 ALUs, and 128 bit GDDR6 memory bus, RX 5500(XT) will be worthy opponent for GTX 1660 Ti.

However, it will not be as good as it can be. So you will pay for cut down product(if it will be the ONLY GPU made from Navi 14 die), knowing that it is not as fast as it can be. Nvidia milking you by jacking up prices. AMD milking you by giving you product that is not fully enabled, and calling it a day.

 

[Bouowmx]

I do not feel like there has to be a Radeon RX 5600 series in between, assuming Radeon RX 5500 series's price point is 200-250 USD.

 

[Mopetar]

The fact that Nvidia readies GTX 1660 Super, with 14 Gbps GDDR6 should tell you guys, how good is Navi 14 performing.

NVidia generally doesn't go out of their way to underestimate their competition. Part of the reason the 1080 Ti was so good is that they were anticipating Vega to be a lot better than it turned out to be. NVidia isn't foolish enough to think that they'll always come out miles ahead, so they're going to build the most capable product that they can. However, they don't have any qualms about jacking up the price when the competition has nothing to match them. The thing with high prices is that they can be cut as soon as they need to be, which is a lot easier than getting a card to perform as it was intended to perform.

 

[lifeblood]

The problem with this is this. Even at 1408 ALUs, and 128 bit GDDR6 memory bus, RX 5500(XT) will be worthy opponent for GTX 1660 Ti.

I think this is where we disagree. Based on the leaked specs and benchmarks I think it's going to beat the GTX 1650 for around $150 but is not even close to a 1660 Ti competitor. The specs & benchmarks we've seen puts it around RX 570 performance which generally beats the GTX 1650. The 1660 Ti is, according to Anandtech's launch article, averaging 10 - 15 FPS over the RX 590. I just don't see 22 CU's with a 128 bit memory bus hitting that level of performance.

I'm perfectly willing to eat crow if it does, but as of now I don't see it.

 

[maddie]

And now it appears that there might... not be RX 5600 series... Only 5500.

For sure RX 5500 XT has been leaked, but also there is talk about RX 5500 and 5500M. 5500M has 1408 ALUs(22 CUs). And we know Navi 14 has 24 CUs as full design. Which gives hope that RX 5500 XT, which will come with only 8 GB configs, looking at the leaks, at least from Gigabyte, will be full design, with 1536 ALUs.

I have to tell you guys. If AMD will NOT sell full die on desktop, I will pass on it, no matter how good value it will be. Im tired of being as a consumer milked by companies.

I am willing to pay. I don't expect miracles(like: Between GTX 1660 Ti and RTX 2060 performance for 199$). I just want product as good as it can be for the money they ask me for it.

1536 ALUs, 128 bit GDDR6, 4/8 GB(does not matter to me) for 249$, with performance equal to GTX 1660 Ti, but more efficient. That is all Im asking for.

This is one of the strangest statements I've ever read from you. "No matter how good a value" and "milked" should really not be used together.

 

[Bouowmx]

Part of the reason the 1080 Ti was so good

GP102 does not appear to have anything extra to preempt Vega. GP102 has 3x the cores of GP106, like in Maxwell GM200 = 3 * GM206, or Turing TU102 = 3 * TU116.

 

[Glo.]

This is one of the strangest statements I've ever read from you. "No matter how good a value" and "milked" should really not be used together.

Because AMD can offer 22 CU GPU with 4 GB VRAM for lets say 169$, that will be faster than GTX 1660, but slower than GTX 1660 Ti, as a top SKU model.

That is good value. But it is not the best AMD can do with this die. Which is the whole point of my rant.

 

[maddie]

Because AMD can offer 22 CU GPU with 4 GB VRAM for lets say 169$, that will be faster than GTX 1660, but slower than GTX 1660 Ti, as a top SKU model.

That is good value. But it is not the best AMD can do with this die. Which is the whole point of my rant.

Value is value. What does "not the best they can do" have to do with it. Performance/price = value, for whatever parameter is important to you. The internals of the black box really only matters to the connoisseur.

 

[Glo.]

Value is value. What does "not the best they can do" have to do with it. Performance/price = value, for whatever parameter is important to you. The internals of the black box really only matters to the connoisseur.

Lets assume they offer RX 5500 as 1408 ALU, 4 GB GPU for 169$. This GPU performs between GTX 1660 and 1660 Ti, but much more efficient. Full die has 1536 ALUs, and is able to be fit with 8 GB's of VRAM. It would perform the same as GTX 1660 Ti. Why is it weird that I want best possible product out of that die?

 

[tajoh111]

The problem with this is this. Even at 1408 ALUs, and 128 bit GDDR6 memory bus, RX 5500(XT) will be worthy opponent for GTX 1660 Ti.

However, it will not be as good as it can be. So you will pay for cut down product(if it will be the ONLY GPU made from Navi 14 die), knowing that it is not as fast as it can be. Nvidia milking you by jacking up prices. AMD milking you by giving you product that is not fully enabled, and calling it a day.

A 1408 Cu die/128 bit bus ddr6 navi would be significantly behind a gtx 1660 ti.

Navi is already bandwidth starved and to have the same amount of bandwidth per ALU as the 5700xt, the 5500xt would need to have 1280 shaders. Considering the 5700 series is already bandwidth starved, starving the bandwidth further is not going to make it catch up with a 1536 shader/192bit ddr 6 bus in the GTX 1660 ti. The 1660 ti has greater bandwidth per core vs the RTX series and shows greater performance in game vs teraflop as a result.

Considering the likely lower clocks of this card vs the 5700xt, the bandwidth deficiency and almost 10% less shaders, the 5500xt could be a touch behind a 1660. AMD is milking us the very same way Nvidia is. That is jacking up prices and not passing on any nodal savings/manufacturing cost savings onto us.

 

[Glo.]

A 1408 Cu die/128 bit bus ddr6 navi would be significantly behind a gtx 1660 ti.

Navi is already bandwidth starved and to have the same amount of bandwidth per ALU as the 5700xt, the 5500xt would need to have 1280 shaders. Considering the 5700 series is already bandwidth starved, starving the bandwidth further is not going to make it catch up with a 1536 shader/192bit ddr 6 bus in the GTX 1660 ti. The 1660 ti has greater bandwidth per core vs the RTX series and shows greater performance in game vs teraflop as a result.

Considering the likely lower clocks of this card vs the 5700xt, the bandwidth deficiency and almost 10% less shaders, the 5500xt could be a touch behind a 1660. AMD is milking us the very same way Nvidia is. That is jacking up prices and not passing on any nodal savings/manufacturing cost savings onto us.

Riiight, and because Navi is bandwidth starved Nvidia has to ready 1408 ALU + 192 Bit GDDR6 14 Gbps GPU, and 1650 Super with 1280 ALUs,, 128 Bit GDDR6 memory bus, based on TU116, to even compete with Navi 14 GPUs?

Based on Competerbase.de tests we know that "IPC"(if such thing exists for GPUs) for Navi is higher than it is for Turing. There is no reason why it would be slower, considering that 224 GB/s is plenty enough to feed the cores.

 

[darkswordsman17]

With regards to naming, people remember they used to do odd/even? The 9700/9500 led to the 9800/9600. Granted that didn't hold up all the time and they went the other direction (X1800 to X1900). And its been a big mess plenty.

Maybe we get 5800/5600 next year though.

Because AMD can offer 22 CU GPU with 4 GB VRAM for lets say 169$, that will be faster than GTX 1660, but slower than GTX 1660 Ti, as a top SKU model.

That is good value. But it is not the best AMD can do with this die. Which is the whole point of my rant.

I'm guessing maybe the fully enabled one is for mobile where it'll command a premium (and where the extra CU count can help combat clock speed issues from power/thermals that mobile presents)?

I still expect there will be a 5600 series, maybe just not on October 7. Everything points to the 5500 being an RX 560 replacement. The 580/570 cards will still need to be replaced. I suspect they’re not releasing the 5600 series yet because the 580/570 cards are still selling so well. The 570 4Gb in particular has been a price/performance champ.

Regardless of what AMD releases and when, I’ve given myself a dead line of Black Friday for a new card. Unless AMD puts a worthy competitor on the table for at most $250, I’m getting the 1660 Ti. My little RX 570 has been doing an admirable job but it’s starting to stutter on my new Ultra-wide Freesync monitor.

The 1660Ti is $280. What if their competition there is a $300 5700? It'd be easy to justify an extra $20 for the extra performance (and extra VRAM) of a 5700 in that case.

Of course that leaves plenty of room for AMD to fill out between the 5500 and 5700, so it would seem like a good expectation of a 5600 in there. $200-250 with 4GB on the lower and 8GB on the higher. But maybe a 5700LE for $280?

 

[maddie]

Lets assume they offer RX 5500 as 1408 ALU, 4 GB GPU for 169$. This GPU performs between GTX 1660 and 1660 Ti, but much more efficient. Full die has 1536 ALUs, and is able to be fit with 8 GB's of VRAM. It would perform the same as GTX 1660 Ti. Why is it weird that I want best possible product out of that die?

Because then you're behaving as a theoretical designer and placing value on what you think should be. Does the RX570 have a poor value because the RX580 exists? What if the RX580 never existed? Will the RX570 have poor value then, because that's the exact argument you're using.

 

[Glo.]

So far it appears that RX 5500 has 22 CUs, and RX 5500 XT has 8 GB's of VRAM. Possibly - with full die enabled.

Both are reasons why Nvidia is readying GTX 1650 Super with 1280 ALUs, 4 GB GDDR6, and GTX 1660 with 14 Gbps, 192 bit GDDR6.

AMD will undercut Nvidia massively with 169$ price tag for 5500 and 199$ for RX 5500 XT with 8 GB's and 24 CUs.

For now, this is most realistic thing that will happen.

 

[lifeblood]

The 1660Ti is $280. What if their competition there is a $300 5700? It'd be easy to justify an extra $20 for the extra performance (and extra VRAM) of a 5700 in that case.

Of course that leaves plenty of room for AMD to fill out between the 5500 and 5700, so it would seem like a good expectation of a 5600 in there. $200-250 with 4GB on the lower and 8GB on the higher. But maybe a 5700LE for $280?

That's precisely what the dude in the video Glo posted a few posts back was suggesting, that the 1660 Ti competitor is a further cut down 5700. I just hope the price is not $300. I'm really not willing to pay more than $250. Of course, as you say, if it out performs the 1660 Ti than a higher price tag is definitely justified.

And hopefully they'll call it 5600XT and not 5700LE. Just something about buying an LE branded card.

 

[darkswordsman17]

That's precisely what the dude in the video Glo posted a few posts back was suggesting, that the 1660 Ti competitor is a further cut down 5700. I just hope the price is not $300. I'm really not willing to pay more than $250. Of course, as you say, if it out performs the 1660 Ti than a higher price tag is definitely justified.

And hopefully they'll call it 5600XT and not 5700LE. Just something about buying an LE branded card.

Ah, I don't watch most of the videos people post any more (especially the rumor/speculation ones).

I would expect it would be cheaper. Best Buy is selling the 5700 for $290 and its 6 weeks from Black Friday. Depending on what it ended up as, they should have plenty of room in the $250-300 range.

Yeah LE has a bad history, but from AMD's standpoint the 5700 series seems to be successful, so it might would do better as a 5700 model, and like I said maybe they have plans for 5600/5800 that would be bad for these right now. I would assume it would be fused chips at that point (and probably the normal 5700 being fused as well so that people can't unlock it to XT - which I'm not sure what was happening there but I saw some remark about the 5700 being the card they recommend because it could be unlocked somehow but I think that was more something related to clock speeds?).

Which, I personally would love if AMD took the opportunity to do a kinda "Nano" 5700. A compact card where they keep clock speeds low (for power and thermals) but be fully active otherwise. It'd let them slot the performance into the proper segment, give consumers looking for a compact card an option, and let AMD showoff the efficiency that 7nm can offer.

 

[lifeblood]

I would expect it would be cheaper. Best Buy is selling the 5700 for $290 and its 6 weeks from Black Friday...

I saw that same deal and my hand started twitching, but as you said, its 6 weeks from Black Friday. I can wait.

 

[Glo.]

igor´sLAB | PC & Components | Reviews & News

www.igorslab.media

People wanted Navi 1408 ALU GPU to be around RX 570. No, it won't be.

 

[soresu]

igor´sLAB | PC & Components | Reviews & News

www.igorslab.media

People wanted Navi 1408 ALU GPU to be around RX 570. No, it won't be.

As in worse than 570, or better?

By my count, at 1.6 ghz a 22 CU/11 WGP RDNA chip would be about the same perf as a 5.5 teraflop GCN chip using AMD's 1.25x IPC math - or around 8% higher perf than 570.

That's assuming 1.6 ghz of course, it could still match 570 perf at a lower clock and significantly increased perf/watt.

 

[Krteq]

AMD announces Radeon RX 5500 Series with GDDR6 memory

Quite a good performance for Navi 14(?). Let's wait for pricing

 

[Glo.]

The framerates are equalling, besting, or being just slightly below GTX 1660.

But AMD compares this GPU to GTX 1650. Would they price it at the same level?

Also - no mention of power draw of this GPU.

 

[Glo.]

So, 110W TDP, GTX 1660 performance level, 8 pin connector, PCIe 4.0.

No pricing as of yet.

 

[amrnuke]

The framerates are equalling, besting, or being just slightly below GTX 1660.

But AMD compares this GPU to GTX 1650. Would they price it at the same level?

Also - no mention of power draw of this GPU.

One rumor has it that they will be priced ~RX570-580 MSRP ($169-229), yet another reports $149 for 5500 and $199 for 5500 XT.

If they put out a 5500 at $149 and XT at $199 and they scale performance well from 5700/XT, I'll need a change of underpants.