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

[beginner99]

This makes no sense. Why would I buy an nVidia card now that is 5% slower and 10% more expensive than the AMD card I can get in a month?

If the nVidia card was a bad deal before Navi's prices were released it's still a bad deal now after the prices are released.

Why? Because in a month NV will have an answer which will make the 2070 cheaper (2070 super). Plus NV has more features, if you need them and a lot more brand value. Especially brand value matters. people won't go to AMD due to this meager difference.

Both cards are bad deals but what can you do in a duopoly? Only other "option" is to wait at least 1 year longer for Intels first try. Before Navi released, one could have hoped for better deal.

 

[maddie]

A 20 CU die is coming later. Probably won't be $200, though.

?????

Predicting no more $200 cards? Surely they can't be that blind.

 

[Glo.]

A 20 CU die is coming later. Probably won't be $200, though.

By the time it will come, Nvidia will lower MSRPs on RTX GPUs, AMD will have to lower their MSRPs, and that 20 CU GPU will be in sub 200$ price range market.

 

[maddie]

You'll be back! Unless you have kids, fixed income, or back problems - PC gaming no matter the cost will always be better!

(You know you don't have to run out and buy every shiny new piece. As I get older and my back hurts more I find myself less interested in working on my rig. Better to just get some OP parts and sail the lazy river of innovation until something truly generational pops up.)

He's from Greece. There really are limits different to yours.

 

[AtenRa]

You'll be back!

I couldn't resist

Unless you have kids, fixed income, or back problems - PC gaming no matter the cost will always be better!(You know you don't have to run out and buy every shiny new piece. As I get older and my back hurts more I find myself less interested in working on my rig. Better to just get some OP parts and sail the lazy river of innovation until something truly generational pops up.)

I thing i will only use laptops for PC gaming. Im more in to strategy games now so I may try a Ryzen APU Laptop next. I actually tried one last summer and returned it back (Lenovo ultra-thin) because it had a bug with CPU cooling and CPU clocks.

But for desktop, i will not spend a single penny for gaming any more. I will buy a next Gen console.

 

[AtenRa]

He's from Greece. There really are limits different to yours.

My problem is not economical if that is what my stance is seems like, I just got sick with prices getting higher and higher with no actual performance increases the last 3-5 years.

 

[amrnuke]

I took a look at Anandtech's Radeon VII review from earlier this year to snag average fps at 4K ultra for 2070, 2080, 1080ti, Vega 64, and Radeon VII. If (and this is a big if), 5700 XT sees a 14% boost across the board over Vega 64, that places the card about 2% better than the 2070, 21.5% worse than the 2080, and about 15.5% slower than the Radeon VII. That's old news. While not groundbreaking, it's a fine card. What I think will be interesting is how the plain 5700 stacks up against the 2070.

So I checked out the Anandtech 2060 FE review. 2070 is 19% faster than 2060, and the Vega 64 was 7.9% faster than 2060. On the slide show at E3, the average gain of 5700 over 2060 was 11%. This means, possibly, that the 5700 is a handful of percent faster than the Vega 64.

This is how the products seem to shake out:

• +0.0% -- 2060 ($348)
• +7.9% -- Vega 64 ($399)
• +11.0% -- 5700 ($379)
• +19.0% -- 2070 ($449)
• +23.0% -- 5700 XT ($449)

For reference, it appears the Radeon VII is about 15% faster and the 2080 is another ~20% faster than the 2070/5700 XT.

If this pans out, I think AMD have actually done fairly well here, providing a card a little better than the Vega 64 (for $20 less), and another card that seems to hit the middle between the Vega 64 and Radeon VII for $50 more than the Vega 64 (and $230 less than Radeon VII).

I for one don't think they really missed the mark by much. I don't know how much each card will cost to build, but if they'd placed the 5700 at $359 and the 5700 XT at $429 it would have been a slam-dunk (IMO). No fancy windmill dunk, but one nonetheless.

 

[DrMrLordX]

These are great cards.

They hit a little higher in the performance department than I expected, but to what effect? The RTX 2070 is a terrible card, and the 2060 isn't much better. Why did they shoot for the worst parts of NV's lineup, and then mostly match their prices?

In a vacuum, they do seem okay. Vega64 was $499 at launch. If 5700XT is indeed faster than Vega64 for "only" $449 then that's okay-ish. Two years later. Not really stunning.

Meanwhile, AMD already replaced RX Vega64 with Radeon VII, so I'm not sure why the market wants another replacement for Vega64.

PCWatch's Hiroshige Goto(who I put in high regard) speculated there was a possibility Intel had to rearchitect Skylake to account for the problems they were having on the 14nm process to reach higher clocks.

Skylake also came from a different design house (Haifa) than Broadwell. If that tells you anything.

So no mention of the anti lag or image fidelity features which in my opine are infinitely much better features than DLSS(only to be seen on FF demo??), RT which is a waste this generation. Still the usual suspects will continue harping on about "less features"

Jury's still out on anti-lag. We're going to have to have independent reviews on that to see how well it works. There may be tradeoffs. I see no reason why that's exclusive to Navi, though. That feature should work on the entire Radeon stack from how they described it.

As for the image fidelity feature, it's open source (which is the #1 best part about it) and seems to be a software-based solution that can utilize existing GPU compute resources for proper operation. Which means the feature should work on NV cards and AMD cards that are not Navi (such as Radeon VII).

Is AMD abandoning the main mass market?

Not exactly. I suspect AMD is pushing midrange gamers to consoles.

Need to clear Polaris models first?

As I posted earlier in this thread, every Polaris except the 590 has sunk to prices as low as $160 (or lower; you can get an RX 580 for $160 right now). If they want to release a midrange card in the $200-$300 price range, all they have to do is cut off supplies of the RX 590, which they should have done by now anyway. Vega56/64 were cut off months ago. There's little risk of AMD competing with themselves in the midrange market.

My problem is not economical if that is what my stance is seems like, I just got sick with prices getting higher and higher with no actual performance increases the last 3-5 years.

Things are okay on the CPU side. I think you'll like what the R5 3600 can do, especially if you want to overclock. On the GPU side, it isn't so pretty. You have to pay to play.

 

[fleshconsumed]

I'm late to the party, but from my perspective NAVI is yet another disappointment just like VEGA. Even if we discount the fact that AMD is selling 250mm chip for $450, it has nothing to offer over nVidia. I do not understand why everyone keeps quoting $500 for 2070. I got an email from newegg this morning - I can get top notch ASUS ROG Strix GeForce RTX 2070 (triple fan aftermarket design) for $450 after promo code and rebate delivered to my door in 2 days. For the same price as NAVI I get aftermarket card that is going to be quieter, consumer less power, and run cooler than the dreaded blower style NAVI. Plus I also get new Wolfensten game. Why in the world would I get NAVI at its listed price of $449?

I said it previously in the thread, I'm not anti-AMD, I have 5 (Five) Ryzen CPU's in house and my current video card is RX480 8GB, I would love to support the little guys (AMD) in their fight against nVidia, but they have to offer me something compelling. Ryzen 1xxx/2xxx may not have been as fast as Intel in single threaded applications, but they were darn good value, RX480 was a bit slower than 1060, but it was also a bit cheaper and had 2GB more RAM. NAVI offers me absolutely nothing over 2070. It performs about the same, it consumes same or more power, it costs the same or more once you adjust for aftermarket cooler NAVI is going to cost. Given the current $450 street price for 2070, can anyone tell me why would I buy blower NAVI over aftermarket 2070?

 

[Glo.]

I thing i will only use laptops for PC gaming. Im more in to strategy games now so I may try a Ryzen APU Laptop next. I actually tried one last summer and returned it back (Lenovo ultra-thin) because it had a bug with CPU cooling and CPU clocks.

But for desktop, i will not spend a single penny for gaming any more. I will buy a next Gen console.

PC Gaming is more and more each year E-Sports focused, while console is where the main volume of revenue for companies comes from. And it is in most titles better experience, than on PC. Apart from Stategic and FPS games...

 

[piesquared]

They hit a little higher in the performance department than I expected, but to what effect? The RTX 2070 is a terrible card, and the 2060 isn't much better. Why did they shoot for the worst parts of NV's lineup, and then mostly match their prices?

In a vacuum, they do seem okay. Vega64 was $499 at launch. If 5700XT is indeed faster than Vega64 for "only" $449 then that's okay-ish. Two years later. Not really stunning.

Meanwhile, AMD already replaced RX Vega64 with Radeon VII, so I'm not sure why the market wants another replacement for Vega64.

Yes the 2070 is a terrible card, but that is what is on the market it's the exact opposite of what you keep referring to as a 'vacuum'. What rational business would target a fictional, imaginary card? You're argument makes no sense whatsoever, it's like you are spinning in circles chasing your tale. There is no vacuum here, the 5700 XT's competition is the 2070 and it beats it in performance and price. It's really that simple. Whether it's 6 months after the 2070 or 6 years means nothing if somebody wants to go buy a card on July 7th. Since nobody has invented a time machine, buying a card is done in the context of the presence. Yesterday is meaningless.
How many people's thought process goes like this:

I would like to buy a new card.
X card is faster than Y card and it's cheaper.
But Y card was out first so i'll buy it so i can have a more expensive card and get less performance.

Clearly that makes no sense.

 

[fleshconsumed]

Yes the 2070 is a terrible card, but that is what is on the market it's the exact opposite of what you keep referring to as a 'vacuum'. What rational business would target a fictional, imaginary card? You're argument makes no sense whatsoever, it's like you are spinning in circles chasing your tale. There is no vacuum here, the 5700 XT's competition is the 2070 and it beats it in performance and price. It's really that simple. Whether it's 6 months after the 2070 or 6 years means nothing if somebody wants to go buy a card on July 7th. Since nobody has invented a time machine, buying a card is done in the context of the presence. Yesterday is meaningless.
How many people's thought process goes like this:

I would like to buy a new card.
X card is faster than Y card and it's cheaper.
But Y card was out first so i'll buy it so i can have a more expensive card and get less performance.

Clearly that makes no sense.

Where are you getting that 5700XT is faster and cheaper than 2070? It is still unclear if 5700XT is actually measurably faster than 2070. It's not cheaper either as I can get Triple fan Aftermarket ASUS Strix 2070 with Wolfenstein game for $450 after promo code and rebate. Why would I get blower style NAVI for $449 when I can get aftermarket 2070 for the same price with a free game bundled?

 

[amenx]

All the comparisons to the 2060/2070 are short term. Its the 2060S and 2070S that the Navis will be compared to. If these S cards arrive at or near same price, but slightly ahead in performance, AMD will have another uphill struggle on its hands.

 

[Bouowmx]

BTW, is NVIDIA SUPER happening today, some time during the remaining of E3, or what? I haven't seen any pre-announcement about it.

 

[DrMrLordX]

What rational business would target a fictional, imaginary card?

If you had read most/all of what I have posted in this thread, you would know that I thought AMD needed to attack the 1660Ti, preferably with a card that was close to the 2060 but cheaper than the 2060. The 1660Ti is and will be a volume sales leader for NVidia. If AMD wants mindshare/marketshare, which they should, then attacking the 1660Ti is job #1. They could replace their Polaris lineup in the process which does a poor job of competing with 1660Ti. It would cannibalize the RX 590, but honestly they should have had their heads checked before they launched that card anyway.

Alternatively they could have attacked their own Vega 64 at a lower price point, which they sort of did, but . . . $50 less for maybe 10-15% more performance, 2 years down the road? That is underwhelming.

There is no vacuum here, the 5700 XT's competition is the 2070 and it beats it in performance and price. It's really that simple.

Beating a terrible card by small margins is no great accomplishment. They won't improve their overall market position doing something like that.

Whether it's 6 months after the 2070 or 6 years means nothing

. . . seriously? This is the PC business. Progress is expected. Those who can't deliver wind up like S3, Matrox, etc. You know better than that. NVidia is playing a slow game to bleed out a dying market. AMD had a chance to inject energy/competition into the business, and they passed on it instead. Thanks AMD.

if somebody wants to go buy a card on July 7th. Since nobody has invented a time machine, buying a card is done in the context of the presence. Yesterday is meaningless.

Why am I not buying a used 1080Ti instead? I can get a FE on eBay for $499 shipped. Some of them are still overpriced (and supplies aren't increasing), but if you're patient, the deals are there. Better deal than a 2070 or a 5700 XT.

But Y card was out first so i'll buy it so i can have a more expensive card and get less performance.

Clearly that makes no sense.

Don't be obtuse, the 2070 isn't selling well at its current price point. AMD copying NV just damns AMD to the same poor sales, with less name recognition to back it up. Nobody wants a $450 card in 2019 that performs worse than a 1080Ti! Radeon VII was already kind of goofy, but they had some excuses - albeit not great ones - for why it cost so much. Now this?

All the comparisons to the 2060/2070 are short term. Its the 2060S and 2070S that the Navis will be compared to. If these S cards arrive at or near same price, but slightly ahead in performance, AMD will have another uphill struggle on its hands.

Exactly. NV must have a plan for counterattack. They've been sitting on Turing for awhile. That gives them plenty of time for optimizations around design (and possibly TSMC's 12nm process, but I'm not 100% sure about that).

 

[lifeblood]

A quick look at Google shows the RTX 2070 at $499, but deals can be found at $450. The RTX 2060 is selling at around $350. Assuming those prices remain at that level then come 7 July I expect the actual street prices for 5700 XT to be as advertised but the 5700 non XT to be $350 or maybe a little less.

I suspect the real price war will begin one the semi and fully customs cards go on sale. I just don't see a lot of people buying blower type cards.

On a slightly different topic, we call the 5700 as being mid-range but it didn't use to be. Mid-range previously was 1080p at 60fps. The 580/570 & 1060 were mid-range which meant excellent performance at 1080p and "Competent" at 1440p. I didn't watch the entire presentation but all AMD appeared to talk about was performance at 1440p. I think 1080p 60fps at will now be the "low" end and 1440p the new mid-range.

 

[alexruiz]

I personally think the cards are fine, if a little higher priced than expected, but in the grand scheme, priced fairly for the performance they offer.

What boggles my mind, and something other fellow posters have addressed is why some people are arguing that the features offer by the RTX series "justify" their higher price, and why because Navi doesn't have them then it is doomed:

- Ray tracing: There is not a game that can use it and maintain playable game settings yet with the existing cards.
- DLSS: Blurry images? pass, thank you.
These are cool features, but of little impact in real life, and hence, of minimal added value.

Navi doesn't need those "cool, but of very little impact features" , because, in the end, it will be pure performance on existing games what defines exactly how good Navi is.

I am expecting a major emphasis on delivering very good drivers at launch. AMD knows we don't need a Hawaii repeat, and I am sure Lisa should have already set this as a a priority.

I am also expecting that the announced prices WILL NOT be the prices when cards are available. AMD should have already accounted for the "super" RTXs, and once they emerge, the RX 5700 will adjust accordingly to the prices that AMD planned initially:
RX 5700 XT $399
RX 5700 $319

We will see

 

[Stuka87]

Its quite possible AMD set these initial prices high because they know nVidia would react. And after nVidia does, then they will adjust.

 

[DownTheSky]

RDNA arhitecture overview PDF

https://gpureport.cz/info/Graphics_Architecture_06102019.pdf

Pretty big changes.

 

[guachi]

I for one don't think they really missed the mark by much. I don't know how much each card will cost to build, but if they'd placed the 5700 at $359 and the 5700 XT at $429 it would have been a slam-dunk (IMO). No fancy windmill dunk, but one nonetheless.

I mentioned on some other forum that Lisa Su should have come out at the end of the presentation and cut prices by $20 (which would make them exactly the price you suggest).

Like you, I think $359 and $429 would have generated a lot more buzz, because at that price it's an obviously better card basically no matter what game you are playing and it anticipates a likely price drop from nVidia. Or say that the $359/$329 is a pre-order price for putting faith in AMD and open up pre-orders right after the presentation.

 

[maddie]

RDNA arhitecture overview PDF

https://gpureport.cz/info/Graphics_Architecture_06102019.pdf

Pretty big changes.

Pretty much. Anyone else thinking some large driver gains to be had or would they have already been incorporated?

 

[Glo.]

If you had read most/all of what I have posted in this thread, you would know that I thought AMD needed to attack the 1660Ti, preferably with a card that was close to the 2060 but cheaper than the 2060. The 1660Ti is and will be a volume sales leader for NVidia. If AMD wants mindshare/marketshare, which they should, then attacking the 1660Ti is job #1. They could replace their Polaris lineup in the process which does a poor job of competing with 1660Ti. It would cannibalize the RX 590, but honestly they should have had their heads checked before they launched that card anyway.

100% agreed. The only way this will happen is if AMD will release 30 CU/192 bit version of Navi 10, because small Navi will not be as performant, as GTX 1660 Ti(close, but not quite).

 

[Glo.]

Pretty much. Anyone else thinking some large driver gains to be had or would they have already been incorporated?

Yes there will be. Changes are too vast for Driver teams been able to perfectly optimize all of the drivers, for the release.

 

[JDG1980]

RDNA arhitecture overview PDF

https://gpureport.cz/info/Graphics_Architecture_06102019.pdf

Pretty big changes.

Good to see that they did add VP9 hardware decoding support. AV1 would have been nice, but no one has gotten around to adding that in hardware yet.

 

[darkswordsman17]

I'll be sitting Navi out. I forget where, but someone said Navi feels like Zen 1, a necessary step, but leaves plenty of progress to be made. I have to agree. There's worthwhile changes, but overall its not enough for me to upgrade especially for the pricing. I'm hoping Arcturus provides a very worthwhile next step, with it being like Zen+ where it had a good mix of improvement but most importantly got pricing in check so that perf/$ really jumped. So kinda like how we saw the 1800X to 2700X. I'm hoping Arcturus gives us another 15-20% performance while getting pricing to the ~$300 range. Which, hopefully they make some gains in traditional rasterization and its not focused on adding ray-tracing hardware (unless its worthwile, like we start to see games actually get performance improvement from say hybrid ray-traced lighting, and the hardware helps improve performance by a good amount).

I'll be interested to see if Navi gains like previous AMD chips have as well. Which that might be more an indication (or indictment) of their driver/software support than anything, so if it doesn't probably just means they're doing a better job of getting utilization from the get go. It'll also be really interesting to see how dGPU Navi differs from the console versions (I have a hunch it'll be quite similar, but probably with some bits for ray-tracing added; it'll be really interesting to see how those differ between the consoles and if any of that can carryover into dGPU; this is one of those times when I wish that AMD, Sony, and Microsoft would collaborate so we could have a consistent one that could be used across consoles and PC).

For now, I think I'm most interested in the new video processing block though. They're claiming some pretty big gains there. After Handbrake added support for their encoder, I can say it definitely needs it. Their h.264 encoder is outright worthless (terrible quality, CPUs can encode better quality as fast or probably even faster), but their h.265 encoder is ok (has a sweetspot where it offers pretty decent quality for the file size but above that you don't gain much and below it you really start to lose quality). Which, maybe that's more Handbrake's support of it (and it improves), but it sounded like Nvidia's was considered considerably better (but again, that might be due to better software support). I hope its robust and programmable since it seems like we might be moving on fairly quickly from h.265, but there's a bit of a format war brewing.

Which not sure why they didn't add HDMI 2.1 support (that's one of the reasons I'm passing on Navi, although it might work out better for me, as maybe we'll have DP 2.0 in time for Arcturus to support it, so can get both at once; something tells me it'll be same situation, we'll get HDMI 2.1, but get stuck with DP 1.4).