Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 29,874
Errrrrrm the Switch?
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
I was about to say the same
The Switch is a tablet
Today Intel announced Microsoft is its newest foundry partner and Intel will be making chips for Microsoft. Shall be interesting to see if this perhaps results in the next gen Xbox dropping AMD for Intel
Pat gelsinger also said he would love to make chips for AMD, maybe rdna5 if Lisa su agrees
Pat gelsinger also said he would love to make chips for AMD, maybe rdna5 if Lisa su agrees
Last edited:
This will put pressure on both Nvidia and AMD, if their AI chip business will lag in sales they will need to either reduce volume (hard to do with TSMC) or move some to the consumer business.
Perhaps Intel will save us in a different way than expected...
Soldato
I'm still pleased I bought my 7900XT all those months ago for £700 with free Starfield!
Hopefully the following gen (AMD 9xxx, nVidia 6xxx) will get more interesting.
Hopefully the following gen (AMD 9xxx, nVidia 6xxx) will get more interesting.
Associate
- Joined
- 28 Jul 2015
- Posts
- 128
In hindsight, that was a banging deal, I remember it was £730 for ages (and 6950xt was £630), I was so close to pulling the trigger.
Ay, you can still get the 6950XT for the same price as the 7800XT in some places here in Denmark if you go by what is in stock. Very happy that I took a chance back many months ago and got my 6950XT when I did. Every time I take a look at the current pricing on GPUs just confirms that it was the right move. I can pay 50% on top of what I paid for the 6950XT and get a 7900XTX and that is only recent due to price drops. Or I can pay 80% more of what I paid for the 6950XT and get an RTX 4080 super(basically 100% for the 4080) and "enjoy" a 40% increase at best. Then there is the 4090 which is roughly triple the cost. Eh colour me not impressed.
Associate
If the next Xbox has an Intel in it they'll have to double the size to fit the PSU and industrial fan it'll need to feed/cool the beast.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 13 Sep 2010
- Posts
- 1,996
Same, although I wish I'd sold the key, haven't played it enough to warrant keeping it and that was mostly out of feeling that I should
Soldato
Same, although I wish I'd sold the key, haven't played it enough to warrant keeping it and that was mostly out of feeling that I should
Yeah the game was crap I played it for all of 10 minutes.
Interestingly, looking at the PS5 Pro leaks, if we take them for granted then it would put that mix of RDNA in terms of RT performance on par with Ampere if not slightly better. Looking at the old DF video of RT - 6800 XT vs 3080, we see that a 2-4x RT increase would have made the 6800 XT either on par or faster than the 3080. Unfortunately I don't think such an optimistic outlook is really possible for desktop, if we look at the RT off vs on % difference improvements gen on gen, things don't look that great for either team (tho NV has less ground to make and still closes more of the gap each gen). Most performance increases even in RT come from mostly bigger & more powerful GPUs rather than specific RT-specific innovations, at least excluding PT (which is mostly **** anyway due to low ray count and crappy denoisers; possibly starts being relevant by 2028 but not now).
www.youtube.com
Ray Tracing Performance Deep Dive: AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT vs Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080
Many thanks to XFX for the RX 6800 XT Speedster Merc 319 Black sample. Yes, we've seen the benchmarks - and it's undeniable that Nvidia's second generation r...
www.youtube.com
Last edited:
Interestingly, looking at the PS5 Pro leaks, if we take them for granted then it would put that mix of RDNA in terms of RT performance on par with Ampere if not slightly better. Looking at the old DF video of RT - 6800 XT vs 3080, we see that a 2-4x RT increase would have made the 6800 XT either on par or faster than the 3080. Unfortunately I don't think such an optimistic outlook is really possible for desktop, if we look at the RT off vs on % difference improvements gen on gen, things don't look that great for either team (tho NV has less ground to make and still closes more of the gap each gen). Most performance increases even in RT come from mostly bigger & more powerful GPUs rather than specific RT-specific innovations, at least excluding PT (which is mostly **** anyway due to low ray count and crappy denoisers; possibly starts being relevant by 2028 but not now).
Ray Tracing Performance Deep Dive: AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT vs Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080
Many thanks to XFX for the RX 6800 XT Speedster Merc 319 Black sample. Yes, we've seen the benchmarks - and it's undeniable that Nvidia's second generation r...
RX 7800 XT
On Port Royal i score 10,569
The FE RTX 3080 scores 11,449, so its 8% faster than an RX 7800 XT.
Dig a little deeper...
Now i don't know why Guru 3D switched to FPS instead of scores with the 3070 Ti, its idiotic as it becomes a meaningless number to people looking at it.
But its 40 FPS compared with the 53 of the 3080, so the 3080 is 32% faster, that would make the RX 7800 XT about 23% faster, in fact they have it at 48 FPS, which is 20% faster, tho 1 FPS in this can be a couple of % so it depends how its rounded out, another reason why switching to FPS was stupid, its imprecise.
I think that's a decent showing for V2 RT cores vs V2 RT cores.
And look at the RX 6900 XT, it scores 45 FPS, 3 FPS lower the the RX 7800 XT, in raster the RX 7800 XT is only about 5% faster than the RX 6800 XT, which scores 41, so the RX 7800 XT is 17% faster is RT.
Another thing to consider is the RX 7800 XT actually only has the same number of RT cores as the RX 6800, 60, its 37% faster than that.
The 7900 GRE as the same 80 RT cores as the 6900 XT, it scores 55 FPS, 15% higher than the RX 7800 XT and 22% higher than the RX 6900 XT.
There isn't actually a huge difference between clock speeds RDNA 2 vs RDNA 3, stock my RX 7800 XT runs at between 2.4 to 2.5Ghz, compared with about 2.2Ghz of the RX 6800, so for about 10% higher clocks i'm getting 37% higher performance, and IPC increase of about 25%, you can see the same thing with the RX 6900 XT vs the RX 7900 GRE as they actually run at about the same clock speed.
There is a chunk of extra performance in the cores RDNA 3 vs RDNA 2, a sub £500 GPU is 20% faster than the admittedly overpriced £600 RTX 3070 Ti of the previous gen Nvidia.
How about the 4070, well that scores 52 FPS, vs my 48 FPS, so its 8% faster.
OK all of that aside if one can say the RT performance on the RTX 3080 and RTX 4070 is not bad, its pretty usable, then i think the same can be said for the RX 7800 XT.
For my personal experience how does it fare? its replaced the 2070 Super, its more than 2X as fast in RT, Port Royal and in games like Control, ecte... its more than just usable.
And look, the RX 6900 XT has 33% more RT cores than my RX 7800 XT, and yet its 5% faster in RT, AMD have improved RT per core, and by quite a chunk.
Last edited:
Soldato
I did the same but paid £830 for a 7900XTX. That was last September and well worth it.
The PS5 Pro comes with BVH8 RT cores, this vs BVH4 on RDNA 2 and 3.
The is the same RT Core on RDNA 4, so the per-cycle RT performance is 2X as fast as RX 7000 series, so a 60 RT core at 2.5Ghz RDNA 4 GPU would have 2X the RT performance of the same RDNA 3 GPU, say an RX 7800 XT.
The is the same RT Core on RDNA 4, so the per-cycle RT performance is 2X as fast as RX 7000 series, so a 60 RT core at 2.5Ghz RDNA 4 GPU would have 2X the RT performance of the same RDNA 3 GPU, say an RX 7800 XT.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2020
- Posts
- 1,455
Would this also reflect in the upcoming 8800xt or whatever?
Yes...
To put it another way, if the RX 7800 XT was RDNA4, not RDNA 3 it would have the same RT throughput as the RTX 4090.
That's not to say it will have the same performance in Cyperpunk RT as the 4090, rasterization still plays a big part in that game even if it is the most RT replacing rasterization game currently, what it does mean is it has that much more horsepower for RT, so unless the RTX 5000 series gets a similar 2X RT bump in performance Nvidia would find it impossible to choke RDNA 4 by just cranking the RT in Cyberpunk higher and higher and higher, all that would do is choke off Nvidia's own performance more than AMD's the higher they push it.
That's not to say it will have the same performance in Cyperpunk RT as the 4090, rasterization still plays a big part in that game even if it is the most RT replacing rasterization game currently, what it does mean is it has that much more horsepower for RT, so unless the RTX 5000 series gets a similar 2X RT bump in performance Nvidia would find it impossible to choke RDNA 4 by just cranking the RT in Cyberpunk higher and higher and higher, all that would do is choke off Nvidia's own performance more than AMD's the higher they push it.
Last edited:
4090 128 SM vs 192 SM rumoured for 5090, that means 5090 has 50% more hardware accelerated RT cores than 4090. If clock speed and IPC stays the same, then 5090 will have 50% better RT than 4090
So if rdna4 has 2x IPC and more cores then it can narrow the gap a lot
So if rdna4 has 2x IPC and more cores then it can narrow the gap a lot
Last edited:
Soldato
Interesting if a PS5 Pro has similar RT performance to a 4080 