• 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.
TNA said:
Well if you want to be completely fair, no one is forcing anyone to preorder. Just wait until January and buy then :p

You can also have it now by paying scalpers. Lol.
Click to expand...

The laugh is the same logic gets used to say AMD is somehow late to the party, bizarre. I think AMD have done exactly the right thing, day very little and let your product speak for itself. There will be plenty of buyers out there if it is good enough.
 
Troezar said:
The laugh is the same logic gets used to say AMD is somehow late to the party, bizarre. I think AMD have done exactly the right thing, day very little and let your product speak for itself. There will be plenty of buyers out there if it is good enough.
Click to expand...

Yeah I said this earlier in another thread. People were whinging this on here yet after the dust has settled its worse for nvidia IMO, they have a product but cant deliver on it. Lots of people will remember this and a stark reminder that no company is too big to fail. Not that they are going to fail, just hopefully dent some of that 80% brainwashing mindshare.
 
Gerard said:
What happened? All gone now.
Click to expand...

Jim apologised and rightly so.

Disagreeing with someone's reviews is one thing but accusing them of faking benchmarks and taking money from Nvidia for a favourable review because they don't come to the same conclusion as you is a whole other level of conceit.

I must admit to being disappointed with Jim as I enjoy his content but would have avoided his YT from now on if not for the apology to Steve.

Thankfully it all seems to have been sorted out amicably and both sides can get on with producing their content.
 
4K8KW10 said:
The likelihood that with a relatively smaller die they will achieve at least performance parity with the large GA102 (628 mm²) is quite low.
Click to expand...
The Navi 10 die was 251mm². The TU106 die was 445mm² (77% larger). The 5700 XT was and is the faster card when compared to the 2070. Nvidia may have improved their manufacturing process since then, but Samsung's 8nm is still hugely inferior to TSMC's 7nm in terms of density. There is quite literally no basis to believe that AMD cannot compete judging by die sizes alone.
 
Aretak said:
The Navi 10 die was 251mm². The TU106 die was 445mm² (77% larger). The 5700 XT was and is the faster card when compared to the 2070. Nvidia may have improved their manufacturing process since then, but Samsung's 8nm is still hugely inferior to TSMC's 7nm in terms of density. There is quite literally no basis to believe that AMD cannot compete judging by die sizes alone.
Click to expand...

At least try to normalise for the TSMC 12nm and TSMC's N7 process lol
TU106 is around 200 mm² on N7.
 
4K8KW10 said:
At least try to normalise for the TSMC 12nm and TSMC's N7 process lol
TU106 is around 200 mm² on N7.
Click to expand...
Nvidia are not using TSMC's 7nm though, so your argument is meaningless. Samsung's 8nm isn't even close in terms of density. I know you're a troll, but let's try to stick to reality and not imaginationland. :)
 
Aretak said:
You literally only post negative stuff about AMD. It's 90% of your posts. I notice you're now trying to redirect the conversation and dodging the point that Samsung's 8nm isn't even close to being close to TSMC's 7nm in terms of density. We're talking 61.18MTr/mm² versus 91.20MTr/mm² here, not a small difference. Your claims based on die size have no basis in fact. You're a low-grade troll.
Click to expand...

Your reading comprehension fails.
At least go back and reread my post - if you don't understand - ask.
But don't accuse - the troll never shouts hold the troll.

And your numbers are not even close to the reality. Navi 21 is estimated at 45.5 MTr/mm²


https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/amd-navi-21.g923

Yes, as long as AMD doesn't get its acts together, I will criticise it.
 
I thought of rechecking the Xbox specs
15.3 B transistors on 360.4 mm2
Around 42.5 M transistors per sq mm
At 536 mm2 for Big Navi.. works out to approx 23 B transistors which is nowhere close to Coretek's 27 B estimate (but still slightly bigger than the 3080).. are there further efficiency gains expected over Xbox SOC? cuz that chip can theoretically pack in 50 B transistors
 
Nablaoperator said:
I thought of rechecking the Xbox specs
15.3 B transistors on 360.4 mm2
Around 42.5 M transistors per sq mm
At 536 mm2 for Big Navi.. works out to approx 23 B transistors which is nowhere close to Coretek's 27 B estimate.. are there further efficiency gains expected over Xbox SOC? cuz that chip can theoretically pack in 50 B transistors
Click to expand...

Yes, and GA102 is 45.06 MTr/mm², so Samsung's 8nm is perfectly in line with whatever TSMC has.
 
LePhuronn said:
"have to" lol. So do Pascal and Turing owners, and arguably so will Ampere owners. But then you're making the assumption that ray tracing will come to PC gaming. Seeing greater adoption of RT because of the consoles doesn't automatically mean PC games and ports will use it. And even then, if you believe the rumours and naysayers, the consoles' RT performance - and by extension Big Navi - is so woeful you won't be missing anything. We never needed ray tracing to enjoy games before, so I hardly think it's the end of the world if PC gamers with low/none RT cards have to disable some half-assed reflections on a handful of surfaces that shouldn't even be reflective in the first place.

So, your point is what?
Click to expand...

sorry what?

turing and ampere users can enable raytracing ( hell even pascal ones but perf is terrible since no RT cores) for equal ( turing ) or better ( ampere ) perf/ visuals than consoles.

rx57xx users? They can’t. They need to buy RDNA2 gpus.

Also RT doesnt equal reflections only. GI makes a big visual difference.

And like i said before, pc gamers are all like ‘pff consoles, pcs have better graphics anyway’. Seems to me like every single AMD user will have to upgrade to RDNA2 or have to admit that consoles have higher settings than their already obsolete gpus.
 
Last edited:
chris85oc said:
And like i said before, pc gamers are all like ‘pff consoles, pcs have better graphics anyway’. Seems to me like every single AMD user will have to upgrade to RDNA2 or have to admit that consoles have higher settings than their already obsolete gpus.
Click to expand...

As will most nVidia users.. so I'm not sure what your point is?
 
chris85oc said:
sorry what?

turing and ampere users can enable raytracing ( hell even pascal ones but perf is terrible since no RT cores) for equal ( turing ) or better ( ampere ) perf/ visuals than consoles.

rx57xx users? They can’t. They need to buy RDNA2 gpus.

And like i said before, pc gamers are all like ‘pff consoles, pcs have better graphics anyway’. Seems to me like every single AMD user will have to upgrade to RDNA2 or have to admit that consoles have higher settings than their already obsolete gpus.
Click to expand...

How many of these people will own a console anyway? You admit pascal will be useless at it, yes pointless. Turing was OK yet still need a 2080+ to make the 4 games playable. Do you think people who bought RX cards got them to be able to do raytracing?

Hell even the 3080 has been signed off as a 1440p card to run all the bells and whistles smoothly, it cant handle 4k yet. Raytracing isnt there yet lets face it so stop making it out to be a necessity when its not. We need to see what both consoles can do now and the RDNA dGPU's with their attempt at it before I absorb if its a worthy feature. Its absolutely pointless worshiping it when so few games actually use it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom