• 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.
Associate
Joined
29 Jun 2016
Posts
529
So if RDNA2 RT perf is same as turing it will also be lacklustre yes?

What about people with rx5700xt cards never seeing RT? I thought people bragged how they buy their gpu and ‘fine wine’ makes them last many generations. Suddenly its already outdated while the turings will be fine.

What about the ‘pc much better than console’ crowd? Both the ps5 and xbx will have better visuals than they will be able to achieve on their 57xx cards due to raytracing.

Again not sure why i have to repeat myself. Yes turings price was very bad at the highend. However in the middle, compared to the rx57xx and what it offered for a minimal difference (50-100e), it was a much better

The extra cost is what makes the RTX 20 series a flop. There was a significant regression in performance per transistor between the GTX 10 series and RTX 20 series, as well as a regression in performance per £.

That's not acceptable, especially when RTX and DLSS were DOA. I agree that there is some longevity arguments, but DLSS is annoying absent from VR where it is arguably most useful and RTX is just coming to fruition now.

As for the 5700xt, it has poor value per transistor compared to the RTX 20 series, and gets destroyed by the RTX 30 series value. It was DOA due to driver issues. AMD were just cashing in on the high price of RTX 20 series cards, simple as that.
 
Soldato
Joined
30 Jun 2019
Posts
7,875
No one is discussing the relevance of N5P to AMD's plans, maybe it's just too boring lol.

Maybe I should post some more GIFs of Meryl from MGS shaking her behind, instead...
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
47,946
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
I'm not 100% on the correctness of this statement, 2.5D stacking and Infinity Fabric are, I think, very different. AMD announced some time back in March I think the details of their 2.5D stacking tech which if I remember rightly was called something like X3D. X3D, if I remember rightly was 2.5D stacked chips connected with Infinity Fabric. Infinity Fabric which released alongside zen only describes the proprietary system interconnect architecture that is Infinity fabric. The fabric itself is broken into multiple other bits of technology so IF is more the combined description of several technologies that fit together to make the multiple data planes that describe infinity fabric.

IF consist of Scalable Data Fabric (SDF) and Scalable Control Fabric (SCF) and within each of these Fabrics specifically SDF you have further technologies including a mechanism called Coherent AMD socKet Extender (CAKE) that ties it all together. Further to that there are two separate types of SDF which are Infinity Fabric On-Package (IFOP) and Infinity Fabric InterSocket (IFIS) so really as far as I can see it's only the name given to their interconnect that can link anything to anything coherently, so basically it describes a shared data plane built directly into it's processors, gpu's, whatever... All coherently working as one or Zen.

I am no expert on any of this so am happy to be put right but i've read quite a bit about infinity fabric as I find it particularly interesting. I also believe that the most ground breaking part of Zen was never Ryzen itself but Infinity fabric and how much of a game changer that is in terms of scalability, power draw etc vs something like say EMIB.

Thanks for that. :)
 
Associate
Joined
29 Jun 2016
Posts
529
AMD will never admit to there being hardware bugs in Navi 1 that contributed to driver problems. I've tried to find a source but no, it won't happen. It's going to remain a rumour or maybe even escalate to an open secret, but it will never be confirmed.

Eh? All designs have bugs, nothing is perfect. That's why AMD release Errata on all their products.
You'll need to be an approved developer to get access though, and there are generally terms and conditions and/or vetting required.

Intel, NVidia, Xilinx, TI, STM, etc etc etc all do the same.
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Jul 2005
Posts
20,105
Location
Officially least sunny location -Ronskistats

hype-train.jpg
 
Associate
Joined
21 Oct 2013
Posts
2,061
Location
Ild
I don't see any hype just the same people posting hype train gifs and images for the last 3 pages. The amount of new information in here is equivalent to the number of 3080s OCUK have ready to ship.
 
Soldato
Joined
30 Jun 2019
Posts
7,875
What if the naming is just that. It's quite possible that there's not much difference between RDNA2 and RDNA3? Except for higher spec ofc.

AMD will not necessarily be thinking - RDNA 2 is the priority (except for consoles ofc). Maybe RDNA 3 is more of a big deal to them?
 
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Joined
15 Jan 2006
Posts
32,408
Location
Tosche Station
What if the naming is just that. It's quite possible there's not much difference between RDNA2 and RDNA3? Except for higher spec ofc.

AMD will not necessarily be thinking - RDNA 2 is the priority. Maybe RDNA 3 is more of a big deal to them?

As far as the rumour mill is concerned RDNA 3 is supposed to be moving to a chiplet based design, which - again, according to the rumour mill - should mean more revolution than evolution. I'm not sure if there's been any real solid evidence of this or if it's pure speculation.
 
Soldato
Joined
30 Jun 2019
Posts
7,875
I haven't seen any confirmation from AMD that RDNA 3 will be MCM / chiplet based designs. I'm not sure how anyone could know that at this point. They would take longer to design and test for one thing.

I think it's much more likely to be single GPU designs @ 5nm.

No mention of RDNA 4 yet either...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom