Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 29,948
Yup, head and shoulders above most of the others tbf!!
-
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.
This work of engineering art was the RDNA 4 high end they designed, RNDA 3 was an iterative MCM design leading to this.
They have shelved the IP and scrapped the GPU.
So in response to youfor AMD to put something like this on the market people actually have to be willing to buy it and pay for it, AMD know people aren't. so it will not exist.
AMD aren't just a protest against Nvidia...
That was first 'leaked' by MLID, so most likely bs. The render is by some other supposed leaker.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 2,822
Bottom line, AMD were incapable of making a competitive product.This work of engineering art was the RDNA 4 high end they designed, RNDA 3 was an iterative MCM design leading to this.
They have shelved the IP and scrapped the GPU.
So in response to you
AMD aren't just a protest against Nvidia...
There's no proof this was even a real planned product ffs, just rumours by a known ******** merchant.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 2,822
I know. Was just pointing out that this "but people don't wanna buy AMD, just want nVIDIA products cheaper" actually means AMD is not competitive. You can't sell something, then you're not competitive, your products are not good enough -at least in the eyes of the buyers.
Not everyone is a die hard nVIDIA fan that will only buy that no matter what. Ryzen proved that with Intel. Problem is, instead of another Ryzen moment this gen when they should have had an easy go, AMD chose greed.
Last edited:
Based on patent IP block diagrams AMD submitted.
Last edited:
How far along it got is up for debate, looks incredibly complicated so would be pricey to say the least.
It would be pricy yes, it would not be a budget GPU, but also probably awesome, its a 14 tile GPU, 9 of those tiles are GPU logic.
You're talking 4090 territory plus for pricing.
Last edited:
Remember how when the highest core count CPU in any segment Intel could provide was 18 cores and AMD were up to 64?
That was only possible because of the work AMD put into MCM.
That was only possible because of the work AMD put into MCM.
Last edited:
I think the RX 8800 XT will consist of one, one of those 9 GPU logic tiles.
Last edited:
They said a few years back they had some crossover with gpu and cpu people, chiplets coming to the gpu side etc.
Yeah, they do exist, i have one of those GPU's, but i think RDNA 3 is a stage 1 incremental MCM GPU, like Zen 1.
I wish, i really wish AMD would just make this thing, and charge £3000 for it if they have to, no one will buy it even if it crushed the 5090, i think they are right about that, but what a statement...
People dont buy the AMD card because of lack of feature set parity to Nvidia and making a £3000 card will just exacerbate this problem. The Nvidia cards are better at RT, have superior upscaling which is more customisable and upgradable, runs cooler and is more efficient. Add Frame Gen, RTX HDR, DLDSR (really nice feature for games with terrible TAA), AI based freestyle filters on top of that and objectively there is just no reason to buy the AMD card unless you just want to support the under dog. Simply being 10% faster than Nvidia and having 4GB more VRAM doesn't compensate for the loss of these features.
I don't know why people keep saying no one will buy AMD even if they are faster. Just look at Ryzen 3D chips which have Intel on the ropes.
AMD needs to create compelling features for their cards, not just look at what Nvidia does and come up with an inferior version of that months later. Sadly this will never happen because AMD will divert the majority of its resources towards the CPU business and the consoles. The Radeon team will get scraps as usual.
Unless AMD decides to invest in Radeon and take it seriously like they did with Ryzen, people will continue buying Nvidia.
Mid range is also not a done deal for AMD. Blackwell midrange will be formidable considering RDNA 4 is weaker than a 7900XTX which in itself barely beats a 4080.
Last edited:
I consider Nvidia's lack of VRam a critical problem, it is a critical problem, if a card cannot run my games properly its flawed. I don't buy things that are 'inherently' broken. AMD can improve software features, I cannot download more VRam from Nvidia.
AMD were losing market to Nvidia while making better and cheaper GPU's, they have a history that is more than 4 years old.
Last edited:
Also, i don't consider those features added value, especially on a mid range card, if i have to pay extra for them then i don't want them.
One more thing.
AFMF is now actually pretty damned good. and its game agnostic, that trumps DLSS for me.
RT, the 4070 is only faster when you crank it up so high its unplayable on both cards.
AFMF is now actually pretty damned good. and its game agnostic, that trumps DLSS for me.
RT, the 4070 is only faster when you crank it up so high its unplayable on both cards.
Last edited:
inb4 "mindshare", "brainwashing", "sheep", "just like apple"
Well said.
It's funny how people disregard/put fingers in ears when it comes to the advantages nvidia offers over amd but but but the only thing that matters is "VRAM!!!!"...... Funny it used to be the driver ui too and well that is gone now given nvidias new redesign, which imo functions better than amds but like I always said, who really cares for this, if you're having to go into your driver control panel often, then I would argue that there is something wrong on your system/gpu, you want an experience where you don't have to worry about settings, tweaking things and so on i.e. you just click play.... Simply put, amd for me right from the 3850 to vega 56 where incredible, last 3-4 years, nvidias RTX set of features is just too great as evidenced by multiple sources now that amd either need to price substantially less or catch up, you can't expect to price a product in same ballpark as your competitor whilst not offering anywhere near the same package and expect it to sell well (sorry I forget "tech journos" and their stack of evidence to backup controversial points doesn't mean anything
)Would love for nvidia to add more vram than amd next time round just so we could see the importance of vram suddenly dwindle, much like what happened with the fury x vs 980ti
Does that mean amd gpus which can't run RT well are also flawed?
Many others and I consider amds lack of good upscaling, FG, reflex/anti-lag and RT focus to be a critical problem. Not to mention other features such as not having anything remotely to compete with RTX HDR and DLDSR. The fact that amd are coming out to say they are improving FSR in the areas where DLSS is superior shows that they realise they are lacking in this particular area.
You do realise, you are also paying for amd features? Where do you think the money to invest in R&D (which in return funds things like freesync, fg, fsr) comes from? Clearly people value such things as nvidia would not keep investing into such RTX features if they weren't deemed to be important to the RTX line of gpus, hence why amd are also copying nvidia because they know they'll lose more market share if they don't provide an alternative, any time nvidia come out with something new which is pretty sought after, amd do a kneejerk reaction to say "we're also working on this!!!!", fast forward months/years later and they launch, how you can't see this is beyond words.
Most of the evidence shows it to be pretty hit and miss and more often miss. FG from AMD is good when it works though but sadly it's the consistency which amd struggle with badly.
Last edited:
@Nexus18 What is funny is that you made it into some sort of issue that previously voiced concerns regarding Nvidia's driver package are no longer an issue to many because Nvidia finally did what people wanted. I thought the point of voicing a concern is to have them improved upon to the benefit of the many in this case. So no it's not funny that it is no longer a topic of discussion it's only logical cause the problem doesn't exist for many anymore and that is a good thing. Now all Nvidia has last is to figure out how to do a UI upgrade without it costing performance. I'm sure they will get there.
I highly doubt nvidia updating their control panel is anything to do with amd and their customers voicing concern otherwise they would have done it years ago or/and lost far more marketshare due to this "disadvantage". Their control panel was dated compared to not just amd but basically every other application on windows so it's more likely nvidia just updating to move with the times. Also, their are numerous reasons to redesign their app/drivers, same reasons amd did theirs, makes things easier for the devs and gives them the potential to do more, that and as they have said themselves, a lot of the options found in the old control panel are no longer used/relevant. The main pros for me to come with this redesign are added features and further improved functionality i.e. the 120 fps shadowplay recording, rtx hdr with the sliders to get exactly what you want and in the future, supposedly being able to swap dlss versions/presets without the need for manual job or/and using dlss tweaks or/and dlss swapper, it's these kind of things that matter, not a fancy UI or loading 2 seconds faster imo.
Personally I would be happy to stick with the old panel as it's extremely functional and as said, outside of initial setup, I never venture back into it. In terms of nvidia specific things, I would use nvidia profile inspector to enable rebar for games where it's not activated by nvidia but that is it.
Also, expand on UI costing performance? There is no performance difference on my end. Unless you are referring to RTX HDR? In which case, it's to be expected considering it's a beta, that and probably expected performance hit given it is using AI/tensor cores to convert SDR into HDR.
How long did/do AMD take when it came to their features and drivers to achieve stability and fix bugs? Months/years.