Question Speculation: RDNA3 + CDNA2 Architectures Thread

[uzzi38]

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 is much bigger than from RDNA1 to RDNA2. We should expect many big improvements in GFX11. 🤔" / Twitter

 

[Timorous]

I wouldn't be so optimistic about N33's performance.
N33 is basically 1/3 of N31. If N31 is 138-139FPS at 4k, then we are talking about 46-47 FPS. Maybe It will have higher clocks, so some extra performance, but RX 6800 manages 63 FPS.

That is a good point. N23 is about half N21 or less with some clock speeds making up for the or less and that is about half the performance.

So yea N33 is looking to be about 6800 at 1080p and maybe 6750XT at 4k, something like that. Still a good uplift vs 6650 but not as great as hoped but not terrible, especially if it manages that at 120W or so.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Tell me you didn't watch the video without telling me you didn't watch the video.

Exactly one part of Steve's rundown of AMD's presentation was negative. The rest was positive and provided factual information, including unique information AMD did not provide.

Dang it. So now I should watch it. You people are confusing me.

 

[Timorous]

RX 816 which was not on the slides is on AMDs website for the perf/watt claim.

RX-816 – Based on AMD internal analysis November 2022, on a system configured with a Radeon RX 7900 XTX GPU, driver 31.0.14000.24040, AMD Ryzen 9 5900X CPU, 32 GBDDR4-7200MHz, ROG CROSSHAIR VIII HERO (WI-FI) motherboard, set to 300W TBP, on Win10 Pro, versus a similarly configured test system with a 300W Radeon 6900 XT GPU and driver 31.0.12019.16007. System manufacturers may vary configurations, yielding different results.

they went sneaky sneaky there by comparing 7900XTX @ 300W vs 6900XT @ 300W. Not impressed about that.

Still 6950XT gets about the same perf/watt as the 6900XT so I expect 7900XTX probably scales upto 335W in a similar way but that extra 20W probably results in a drop off of perf/watt so I think better to just say 1.54x perf/watt @ 335W putting it on the lower end of their upto 1.7x performance increase claim.

 

[Heartbreaker]

Reminds me a lot of 6900xt vs 3090. AMD was close and much less expensive but behind on RT.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Question: Do they massively focus on driver optimizations for the games they present? Or is it possible we could see some nice gains via updates down the road?

 

[Stuka87]

RX 816 which was not on the slides is on AMDs website for the perf/watt claim.

RX-816 – Based on AMD internal analysis November 2022, on a system configured with a Radeon RX 7900 XTX GPU, driver 31.0.14000.24040, AMD Ryzen 9 5900X CPU, 32 GBDDR4-7200MHz, ROG CROSSHAIR VIII HERO (WI-FI) motherboard, set to 300W TBP, on Win10 Pro, versus a similarly configured test system with a 300W Radeon 6900 XT GPU and driver 31.0.12019.16007. System manufacturers may vary configurations, yielding different results.

they went sneaky sneaky there by comparing 7900XTX @ 300W vs 6900XT @ 300W. Not impressed about that.

Still 6950XT gets about the same perf/watt as the 6900XT so I expect 7900XTX probably scales upto 335W in a similar way but that extra 20W probably results in a drop off of perf/watt so I think better to just say 1.54x perf/watt @ 335W putting it on the lower end of their upto 1.7x performance increase claim.

The 6950 at 300W should have the exact same performance as the 6900 at 300W. The 6950 is only faster because they cranked up the clocks which required they crank up the power.

 

[Timorous]

Reminds me a lot of 6900xt vs 3090. AMD was close and much less expensive but behind on RT.

Looks about identical.

3090 is around 10% faster than the 6900XT at 4K and if the 7900XTX is actually 54% faster than the 6950XT on average the 4090 will be around 10% faster than the 7900XTX.

Looks like the RT gap grew slightly as well but so did the price an TBP gap.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Reminds me a lot of 6900xt vs 3090. AMD was close and much less expensive but behind on RT.

That is what many of us thought was the most likely scenario. Competing on price and targeting the average gamer is their best strategy. Nvidia has not goofed in a long time, or sat on their hands. Instead they have the pedal to the medal.

 

[DooKey]

Nvidia doesn't care. They know that they've got the average gamer by the balls. AMD cards are preferred by value conscious gamers who actually think their purchase through and weigh the pros and cons. Most Nvidia buyers (especially the younger ones) simply pay. It's Nvidia! That's enough reason for them. I don't expect any reactive pricing change from Nvidia.

10 years ago is looking for you. The NV buyers are dumb and AMD buyers are smart is old.

 

[Tuna-Fish]

Hmmm. I wonder what the folks who made fun of Nvidia will say now.
Probably that AMD did it now they will herald it as the best innovation ever.

Still think that it's a terribly bad idea.

 

[Aikouka]

Dang it. So now I should watch it. You people are confusing me.

The negative remarks in the video were pretty much solely directed at the marketing speak and other less-than-clear things stated during the presentation.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

10 years ago is looking for you. The NV buyers are dumb and AMD buyers are smart is old.

I'd extend to most buyers/people are dumb. That's what makes brand recognition and reputation so important.

 

[gdansk]

Reminds me a lot of 6900xt vs 3090. AMD was close and much less expensive but behind on RT.

Yes, but this time there's no $700 RTX 4080 drawing me to Nvidia. Or even $800. Or even $1000... I could go on.

 

[SteinFG]

My question - What will happen with Navi 32?

Navi 31 has 1.6x compute units of Navi 32 (96 vs 60).
Navi 31 also has 1.6x raster perf of Navi 21 (according to AMD).

So, will Navi 32 be released on desktop? or 6900XT will just fill for it.

 

[gdansk]

My question - What will happen with Navi 32?

Navi 31 has 1.6x compute units of Navi 32 (96 vs 60).
Navi 31 also has 1.6x raster perf of Navi 21 (according to AMD).

So, will Navi 32 be released on desktop? or 6900XT will just fill for it.

It does seem to be in a tough spot. But it's possible it will trade efficiency for clock rates to make up for it.

 

[DeathReborn]

On AMD site, the specs for 7900 XTX say that the GPU has 6144 Stream Processors.

What the actuall ... is happening with this launch?

https://www.amd.com/en/products/graphics/amd-radeon-rx-7900xtx

They Bulldozer'd the architecture, think of it like 1 Core now has 2 ALU's instead of 1.

 

[amenx]

My question - What will happen with Navi 32?

Navi 31 has 1.6x compute units of Navi 32 (96 vs 60).
Navi 31 also has 1.6x raster perf of Navi 21 (according to AMD).

So, will Navi 32 be released on desktop? or 6900XT will just fill for it.

Would be disappointing since the 6900xt was only marginally ahead of the 6800xt.

 

[Thibsie]

My question - What will happen with Navi 32?

Navi 31 has 1.6x compute units of Navi 32 (96 vs 60).
Navi 31 also has 1.6x raster perf of Navi 21 (according to AMD).

So, will Navi 32 be released on desktop? or 6900XT will just fill for it.

If all those 6xxx cards could drop a little more ...

 

[Harry_Wild]

Full presentation - 47 minutes!

 

[tajoh111]

If all those 6xxx cards could drop a little more ...

What people are missing is the 1.7x is an up to, and not only that includes ray tracing which is the most improved aspects of the new cards.

Considering that 1.54x improvement is overall and not just raster, we are probably looking at a 1.45 improvement in pure raster and a 1.6 to 1.7 in ray tracing. That is if AMD is being honest with it's performance per watt improvement. If there is some fudge from them, this could be a 1.38% improvement in raster and a 1.55% increase in ray tracing overall as an average and the improvement in performance per watt is more in the 1.45x. Both are possible. There is a small possibility that it's better than this but considering the hype train so far, I would recommend for people to be cautious are definitely closers to the most pessimistic expectations than the most positive expectations. I.E 1.4x vs 2.5-3x

 

[Heartbreaker]

FSR 3, sounds exactly like DLSS 3, given the 2x performance of FSR 2 claim. So just frame interpolation...

 

[Hitman928]

What people are missing is the 1.7x is an up to, and not only that includes ray tracing which is the most improved aspects of the new cards.

Considering that 1.54x improvement is overall and not just raster, we are probably looking at a 1.45 improvement in pure raster and a 1.6 to 1.7 in ray tracing. That is if AMD is being honest with it's performance per watt improvement. If there is some fudge from them, this could be a 1.38% improvement in raster and a 1.55% increase in ray tracing overall as an average and the improvement in performance per watt is more in the 1.45x. Both are possible. There is a small possibility that it's better than this but considering the hype train so far, I would recommend for people to be cautious are definitely closers to the most pessimistic expectations than the most positive expectations. I.E 1.4x vs 2.5-3x

You must not have watched the video. The raster improvement was shown as 1.5x - 1.7x. The ray tracing improvement was shown as 1.5x - 1.6x. Later on they did show more ray tracing examples where the improvement was 1.5x up to 1.9x in one example but that one example is not what people are talking about.

 

[jpiniero]

You must not have watched the video. The raster improvement was shown as 1.5x - 1.7x. The ray tracing improvement was shown as 1.5x - 1.6x. Later on they did show more ray tracing examples where the improvement was 1.5x up to 1.9x in one example but that one example is not what people are talking about.

The pricing suggests it won't hold up in practice. I think they absolutely would have gone higher on pricing if it was only 10% slower than the 4090.

 

[gdansk]

The pricing suggests it won't hold up in practice. I think they absolutely would have gone higher on pricing if it was only 10% slower than the 4090.

Pricing can mean many things. Maybe AMD wants to sell some GPUs for once? But yes it could also mean it's a dud. Or maybe they know how important RT is to most gamers. It's hard to say from price and some marketing slides.

 

[igor_kavinski]

AMD CPU + AMD GPU <<< Show your love for AMD AND Mother Earth. The greener alternative to Intel+Nvidia.