• 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.

AMD Navi 23 ‘NVIDIA Killer’ GPU Rumored to Support Hardware Ray Tracing, Coming Next Year

Status
Not open for further replies.
DmitryD said:
Raytracing ain't free, the only time it won't be jeapoardising FPS is when (around 2030) games will be ray-tracing only, so no point of reference to compare in terms of lost frame rates.

4k is particularly difficult for ray tracing since it's a lot more pixels.
Click to expand...
On the RTX 2000 series release, didn't someone say we'd need about 2,000 times the compute power of those cards to do full-scene ray tracing.

I wouldn't expect that in 2030. Sure the software stack will probably make some leaps and bounds, but full-scene RT still seems a very long way out to me.
 
We are very unlikely to see a 100% improvement in performance vs the 5700 XT (even with 80 CUs), because clocks over are supposedly limited to ~2500mhz with RDNA 2. Perhaps a 33% increase in clocks would be possible?

AMD could only achieve that kind of performance improvement with a massive improvement in IPC. So far, all we've heard is around 25% uplift in performance vs GCN.
 
Last edited:
Speculation is al well and good but don't you think you're all too invested in the whole thing? I mean, Jesus came and went with less speculation :p
 
Yup, it's possible there won't be much improvement in IPC vs RDNA gen 1. Lots of people in the rumour mill have said there will be a large boost in IPC, but I don't take that seriously.

'Big Navi' (as referred to by AMD) could just imply a scaled up (60-80 CU) Navi GPU, with much better power efficiency and higher clocks (and new features like VRS and ray tracing).
 
g67575 said:
We are very unlikely to see a 100% improvement in performance vs the 5700 XT (even with 80 CUs), because clocks over are supposedly limited to ~2500mhz with RDNA 2. Perhaps a 33% increase in clocks would be possible?

AMD could only achieve that kind of performance improvement with a massive improvement in IPC. So far, all we've heard is around 25% uplift in performance vs GCN.
Click to expand...

can you elucidate your logic on that one?

5700XT has 40CU and can clock to a little over 2ghz if given the beans.

You are saying that a card with literally twice as many CU’s, potential clocks up to 2.5ghz (seems too high to me but I’ll take you at your word here), and with IPC gains over RDNA1 can’t double performance?
 
Last edited:
Zeeflyboy said:
You are saying that a card with literally twice as many CU’s, potential clocks up to 2.5ghz (seems too high to me but I’ll take you at your word here), and with IPC gains over RDNA1 can’t double performance?
Click to expand...

Yes, assuming similar IPC to RDNA. This is based on the performance difference between the RX 5700 and RX 5700 XT. The 5700 XT has +11.1% more CUs and +10.4% higher clocks, resulting in a 12.7% increase in the 3D Mark Graphics Score. So, it looks like much higher clocks would be needed to double RDNA2 performance.

Another possibility is an 80 CU GPU, combined with 320 TMUs and 128 ROPS. I expect that could potentially improve performance by 90-100% (perhaps with just small IPC or clock improvements).

Or, AMD could combine 80 CUs with 25% higher GPU clocks, and a 75% increase in TMUs and ROPs.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom