*** The AMD RDNA 4 Rumour Mill ***

[TheRealDeal]

I agree with a lot of that but the RX 6700 XT was launched at $480, the RX 7800 XT was $20 more at $500, its 56% faster in raster and 64% faster in RT with 4GB more VRam, AV1 Encode / Decode and has hardware level AI.

Wrong naming, i agree but the amount of GPU you're getting comparatively for $20 more is frankly fantastic, stop hating on it, it makes no sense. Inflation taken in to account its actually cheaper, much cheaper.

Yep was saying that at the time. The 7800xt was really a 7700xt chip but even with the 7800xt name it was priced like a 7700xt. It was only named the 7800xt as AMD decided to name the real 7800xt the 7900xt to price up a very stupid mistake. They should have just followed the 6 series namning and pricing and they would have looked great even with $20 on top of each card.

 

[humbug]

Yep was saying that at the time. The 7800xt was really a 7700xt chip but even with the 7800xt name it was priced like a 7700xt. It was only named the 7800xt as AMD decided to name the real 7800xt the 7900xt to price up a very stupid mistake. They should have just followed the 6 series namning and pricing and they would have looked great even with $20 on top of each card.

Yeah for sure.... the RX 7800 XT is really an RX 6800 with the RX 7900 XT an RX 7800 XT, the 7800 XT is only about 20% faster in raster and 35% faster in RT but its also $80 cheaper.... i don't care its all semantics, i don't mind @CAT-THE-FIFTH idea at all because if you're comparing price to price the 7800 XT is a massive jump for price vs the 6700 XT so...... ¯\(ツ)/¯

The 7900 XT pricing, stupid, stupid stupid stupid stupid!!!!!!! Never again AMD, that was bad. You deserve the **** **** you got for that, that was all on you.

 

[JediFragger]

The 7900 XT pricing, stupid, stupid stupid stupid stupid!!!!!!! Never again AMD, that was bad. You deserve the **** **** you got for that, that was all on you.

This is why I have no faith in AMD to price RDNA4 'correctly', I think they've learned nothing this last couple of years.

 

[humbug]

This is why I have no faith in AMD to price RDNA4 'correctly', I think they've learned nothing this last couple of years.

Yeah i get it.... the fact that after 7900 XT'gate they didn't even try for $550 on the 7800 XT gives me some hope they have already learned that lesson.

 

[GoogalyMoogaly]

None of this makes any sense, they haven't done anything regards to your cited statement RDNA 4 isn't out yet.

They're not making a top end card, you've said they won't drop prices (cuz then Nvidia get out the popcorn, etc.), so what are they going to do to get market share?
They need to do something (and not just a few free games now and then). Nvidia can get away with doing the same thing as they've already done the work to get market share. AMD doing anything doesn't really seem to be part of their ethos, they'll just expect someone else to do something for them. Maybe it's game developers fault for not bending over backward to help AMD for no reason?

Most people can't afford the fastest Graphics card and then opt for a more expensive Nvidia card that's slower than the AMD card in the majority of games because Nvidia have the fastest graphics card. I opted for a 7900xt because it ended up being around £100 or more less expensive than a 4070ti with 8gb more Vram and was more powerful for my needs. Only a fool would pay more for the ti in my use case but the majority do.

Exactly, but a lot of people probably have the mindset that since Nvidia make the fastest card that all their cards are faster than cards not made by Nvidia. And some people will pay the extra for an Nvidia card because it's an Nvidia card and they know Nvidia make the best cards. This is the mindset AMD are up against and the minds they need to change. But that's not going to happen by including a free game. It probably won't even help for a lot of people advertising technologies that they don't understand. Maybe getting good scores in reviews would help, but that means having optimised drivers at release not 18 months after all the reviews are done.

Yep to little to late but when i was buying i just bought the fastest card that made sense to me. Nvidia made no sense what so ever. If people bought with there brain we would have more of a gpu war and maybe a price war.

But some people are going to look that closely into everything they buy, especially if they think they know which is best (fastest graphics card vs NOT fastest graphics card). I looks at reviews for tech stuff, but other things I probably don't look into nearly as much, clothing brands for example.

 

[JediFragger]

Yeah i get it.... the fact that after 7900 XT'gate they didn't even try for $550 on the 7800 XT gives me some hope they have already learned that lesson.

Am kinda grateful that I got this XTX Nitro at a really good price s/h when prices were at their lowest, good solid well-performing card at a good price. Only weakness is the upscale, and I hope they keep on working at it but get the feeling they'll be leaving it behind soon for proper AI hardware upscale with FSR4.

 

[humbug]

There isn't much wrong with current 7000 series pricing, its not perfect but its fine, the problem is RT performance and a lack of a DLSS equivalent, so they aren't competitive, doesn't mean i think they should give them away.

Am kinda grateful that I got this XTX Nitro at a really good price s/h when prices were at their lowest, good solid well-performing card at a good price. Only weakness is the upscale, and I hope they keep on working at it but get the feeling they'll be leaving it behind soon for proper AI hardware upscale with FSR4.

I love watching my frame rates jump 20% just moving a few sliders in the performance tuning tab knowing an £800 4070 Ti has nothing on me in raster.

The card for its £470 is good, really good on its own, fast, cool, quiet, rock solid stable....... but the fact that it does that ^^^^^^ is ******* marvellous.

AMD have come out and said now what the problem was with RDNA 3, they were meant to run at around 3 Ghz but they couldn't really do it with the intended voltage curve due to a bug, so instead they run between 2.4 and 2.5Ghz, the same as RDNA 2,.

What's interesting is they held back Navi 32 for months (7800 XT / 7700 XT) and they clock like monsters, easily.

 

[GoogalyMoogaly]

There isn't much wrong with current 7000 series pricing, its not perfect but its fine, the problem is RT performance and a lack of a DLSS equivalent, so they aren't competitive, doesn't mean i think they should give them away.

Considering so many people don't care about RT or in probably a decent number of case know what it or DLSS actually is, I'm not sure that's the only reason AMD didn't gain a massive amount of market share this generation.

 

[JediFragger]

AMD have come out and said now what the problem was with RDNA 3, they were meant to run at around 3 Ghz but they couldn't really do it with the intended voltage curve due to a bug, so instead they run between 2.4 and 2.5Ghz, the same as RDNA 2,.

Is their a link to that? I'd be interested as there was a LOT of speculation about this a year or so ago (and why it was underperforming around 20% or so). Was it just a clockspeed bug?

 

[humbug]

Is their a link to that? I'd be interested as there was a LOT of speculation about this a year or so ago (and why it was underperforming around 20% or so). Was it just a clockspeed bug?

Don't know the technicalities of it it didn't go in to that much detail but essentially yes, intended clock speed was around 3 Ghz but they couldn't reach that on the intended voltage curve. it would have required a higher curve and with that too much power.
And yet i can run 20% higher performance at 285 watts, up from 250, that's the same power as the 4070 Ti, i don't know what Navi 31 would need to do that, i'm sure you do, remember AMD saying at one point they didn't want a 400+ watt GPU? i think that was the point where they realised the voltage curve problem they had with RDNA 3.

I can't remember where i read that, it was buried in one of those recent interviews between someone from AMD and a tech jurno, it may have been PC World.

 

[JediFragger]

Don't know the technicalities of it it didn't go in to that much detail but essentially yes, intended clock speed was around 3 Ghz but they couldn't reach that on the intended voltage curve. it would have required a higher curve and with that too much power.

I can believe it tbh, the XTX is a power-sucking *beast* if you let it and it will gobble up every watt you allow it. Crazy really, RDNA2 in comparison was quite efficient!

 

[Phixsator]

I can believe it tbh, the XTX is a power-sucking *beast* if you let it and it will gobble up every watt you allow it. Crazy really, RDNA2 in comparison was quite efficient!

The 6950XT can also be a power hungry beast if you let it . Fully unleashed and without software overclocking my 6950 XT Red Devil will suck almost 400 watts. Standard out of the box is 300-330 watts which is also a bit excessive. It's the MO of AMD, their cards are pushed well beyond the efficiency sweet spot. If you know this however, you can tune them and still get solid performance and much lower power consumption, at least with RDNA 2. I'm presuming the same for RDNA 3 but I don't know as I haven't had one of them in my hands. What I find funny is how praised ADA is for efficiency yet I can turn a much bigger and older die into the same performance and power consumption. If I lower the core clock of my 6950 to match the performance of a 4070 it only use roughly 20 watts more(170 vs 190). Worth noting is that the 6950 board has to power a die that is 230ish mm2 bigger and more vram. So either RDNA 2 is extremely efficient but pushed way outta bounds(believable as it is AMD we are talking about) or ADA isn't really that impressive on the power consumption front. I could get my old 6700xt reference(MBA?) from 220 watts to 150 with a quick and dirty tune and only loose around 5% performance.

 

[ICDP]

At the prices AMD launched at for the 7900 range, they had clearly massive profit margins and could have easily launched 20% - 25% cheaper. AMD got greedy and it bit them in the ass because if you want to disrupt or break a competitor’s market share, it’s better to sell 3x GPUs at 20% margins than one at 50%. It means you have a lot more of the market and developers have less incentive to support intense RT levels that make your GPUs look bad.

They can’t sell an objectively worse product at 10% less than Nvidia. Especially if Nvidia are already taking the **** with their pricing and profit margins. So while I agree with @Joxeon in principle, but @humbug has a point that selling at silly low profit margins is not viable either. So for me it’s, get RT performance improved again, add Ray Reconstruction, get FSR improved. Then undercut Nvidia by 15% or 20% max in order to gain market share while keeping good profit margins to drive R&D.

The fact they did exactly this with Zen against Intel, shows that it is possible. Just offer a compelling product at a good price and people will take notice.

They had that opportunity with the 7900 releases, great raster and very decent RT with plenty of VRAM. A 7900 XT at £650 with a game on launch would have been a great seller. The 7900 XTX at £800 would have put the £1200 4080 to shame. And both would still have been making them considerable profit margins while cutting in to the Nvidia market share.

 

[humbug]

This is with my 24/7 overclock, 1080mv, 2900Mhz, power +10%.

270 watts, up from 250, clocking around 2750Mhz, i could run it at around 285 watts and then its around 2900Mhz but IMO this is a good balance, its about 15% higher performance, or 98% a 4070 Ti in raster

60c edge and low 70's hotspot with a sub 40% fan speed, nice and cool and quiet.

Ultra 1440P with high RT.

Its faster than a 6900 XT with this power here. Especially in RT, way faster.

 

[humbug]

I'm going to say it.... i think they fixed it for Navi 32 but didn't clock it as to not make the 7900 XT sweat, shame to think what RDNA 3 could have been...

 

[GoogalyMoogaly]

At the prices AMD launched at for the 7900 range, they had clearly massive profit margins and could have easily launched 20% - 25% cheaper. AMD got greedy and it bit them in the ass because if you want to disrupt or break a competitor’s market share, it’s better to sell 3x GPUs at 20% margins than one at 50%. It means you have a lot more of the market and developers have less incentive to support intense RT levels that make your GPUs look bad.

They can’t sell an objectively worse product at 10% less than Nvidia. Especially if Nvidia are already taking the **** with their pricing and profit margins. So while I agree with @Joxeon in principle, but @humbug has a point that selling at silly low profit margins is not viable either. So for me it’s, get RT performance improved again, add Ray Reconstruction, get FSR improved. Then undercut Nvidia by 15% or 20% max in order to gain market share while keeping good profit margins to drive R&D.

The fact they did exactly this with Zen against Intel, shows that it is possible. Just offer a compelling product at a good price and people will take notice.

They had that opportunity with the 7900 releases, great raster and very decent RT with plenty of VRAM. A 7900 XT at £650 with a game on launch would have been a great seller. The 7900 XTX at £800 would have put the £1200 4080 to shame. And both would still have been making them considerable profit margins while cutting in to the Nvidia market share.

And the other issue is that as people get used to the fact that AMD price gouge at release they're going to wait a few months for the prices to drop. This is also going to make early sales look bad.
I think this is what people mean when they expect AMD to release their cards cheaper in order to get sales. Nobody is really expecting a 7900XT for £200, but if they'd released at ~£750 instead of ~£950 it might have seemed a lot better and it would've still given them some room for special offers and price drops over time. The 7900XT might have been the worst offender but I suspect the same applies to the whole range.

Nvidia might be overpriced but at least you don't have to worry that 3 weeks after you buy it they'll drop the price by 20%.

 

[humbug]

And the other issue is that as people get used to the fact that AMD price gouge at release they're going to wait a few months for the prices to drop. This is also going to make early sales look bad.
I think this is what people mean when they expect AMD to release their cards cheaper in order to get sales. Nobody is really expecting a 7900XT for £200, but if they'd released at ~£750 instead of ~£950 it might have seemed a lot better and it would've still given them some room for special offers and price drops over time. The 7900XT might have been the worst offender but I suspect the same applies to the whole range.

Nvidia might be overpriced but at least you don't have to worry that 3 weeks after you buy it they'll drop the price by 20%.

Which is why AMD should release at the price they would have dropped to and stick with it, if people don't buy them sell them to AI people.

 

[Joxeon]

And the other issue is that as people get used to the fact that AMD price gouge at release they're going to wait a few months for the prices to drop. This is also going to make early sales look bad.
I think this is what people mean when they expect AMD to release their cards cheaper in order to get sales. Nobody is really expecting a 7900XT for £200, but if they'd released at ~£750 instead of ~£950 it might have seemed a lot better and it would've still given them some room for special offers and price drops over time. The 7900XT might have been the worst offender but I suspect the same applies to the whole range.

Nvidia might be overpriced but at least you don't have to worry that 3 weeks after you buy it they'll drop the price by 20%.

Unfortunately AMD are yet to realise that if they sell 20 cards at a £400 profit per card they actually make less than if they sell 100 cards at £100 profit per card, until they figure this out they wont gain any market share.

 

[humbug]

Unfortunately AMD are yet to realise that if they sell 20 cards at a £400 profit per card they actually make less than if they sell 100 cards at £100 profit per card, until they figure this out they wont gain any market share.

5X more cards = 60% marketshare, its so simple right, like adding 2 + 2.

 

[MyBrainz]

Which is why AMD should release at the price they would have dropped to and stick with it, if people don't buy them sell them to AI people.

AMD would probably be better off using AI to predict what price they need to release at