• 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.
LePhuronn said:
Big Navi being 15% faster than a 2080 Ti is pathetic if true. 40 RDNA 1 CUs is only 30% ish slower than a 2080 Ti, double the number of RDNA 2 CUs is barely 50% faster?

I know AMD's GPUs often underperform, but I sincerely doubt this is true.
Click to expand...

15% faster than RTX 2080 Ti and a decent price would be an absolute game changer.

RTX 2080 Ti's are fast and expensive as hell. It's all about context, let's wait for performance and price before condemning AMD.
 
Sargatanas2511 said:
Yep, I would consider 2080Ti +15-20% at around £600. I have a 1440p main monitor and I am pretty sure that would push me up to 144fps in almost everything.
Click to expand...


Same - it'd be a no brainer for me as an upgrade from my 1080Ti.

I'm not paying 1k+ for a gfx card.
 
I bought my 2080 for less then £600. So if I can get a replacement for that price that is 15% faster than a 2080Ti at 4K, I would be getting a close to 50% performance lift. I would be happy with that from either Nvidia or AMD.
 
Boomstick777 said:
15% faster than RTX 2080 Ti and a decent price would be an absolute game changer.

RTX 2080 Ti's are fast and expensive as hell. It's all about context, let's wait for performance and price before condemning AMD.
Click to expand...
I'm not condemning anybody, just saying that I don't buy Big Navi being only 15% faster than a 2080 Ti. If Big Navi comes out at 80 CUs as rumoured then that simply cannot be a mere 15% faster; the superior arch getting less than 50% performance uplift from doubling CUs would be disastrous.

But if it really does turn out AMD have dropped the ball with RDNA 2 at the top (which I doubt) then 15% faster than a 2080 Ti simply cannot cost more than £600 without all of us simultaneously laughing in AMD's face and sobbing into our pillows.
 
LePhuronn said:
I'm not condemning anybody, just saying that I don't buy Big Navi being only 15% faster than a 2080 Ti. If Big Navi comes out at 80 CUs as rumoured then that simply cannot be a mere 15% faster; the superior arch getting less than 50% performance uplift from doubling CUs would be disastrous.

But if it really does turn out AMD have dropped the ball with RDNA 2 at the top (which I doubt) then 15% faster than a 2080 Ti simply cannot cost more than £600 without all of us simultaneously laughing in AMD's face and sobbing into our pillows.
Click to expand...

Doubling up used to only give you around 70-80%. The 5700xt at 4k is more like 40% behind the 2080ti as the ti is cpu limited most of the time below this. So if they double up and say gain 10% ipc that gets you around 50%. It could easily get more though if the clocks are substantially higher.
 
TT158 said:
I'm no expert but I really can't see them not having it. If they don't then I am out, 100 percent. From what I've read the general consensus is very strong that they will.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I am 99% sure that they will have them.
 
If you look at RX 5700 XT and RTX 2070 Super, same amount of shaders/cuda cores and similar performance with Nvidia edging ~5%+ performance with higher clock speed.

On the new arch I'm confident AMD will deliver, either raw performance improvement or performance VS value cost as usual. 5700 XT for example is a hell of a card, at a great price.

Nvidia own the GPU market and AMD are not stupid, they pick their fights. I almost wish AMD would leave the DGPU market and focus just on CPU and APU. Because even if AMD beat Nvidia on all metric I still believe people will buy Nvidia, the mind-share and marketing is so strong. For now it seems like a fight no one can win, or would even want to try.
 
Boomstick777 said:
If you look at RX 5700 XT and RTX 2070 Super, same amount of shaders/cuda cores and similar performance with Nvidia edging ~5%+ performance with higher clock speed.

On the new arch I'm confident AMD will deliver, either raw performance improvement or performance VS value cost as usual. 5700 XT for example is a hell of a card, at a great price.

Nvidia own the GPU market and AMD are not stupid, they pick their fights. I almost wish AMD would leave the DGPU market and focus just on CPU and APU. Because even if AMD beat Nvidia on all metric I still believe people will buy Nvidia, the mind-share and marketing is so strong. For now it seems like a fight no one can win, or would even want to try.
Click to expand...

I think maybe 4 years ago, the same could well have been said about the CPU market. Yet here we are with the tables having turned, and mindshare starting to move across.
AMD played a brilliant move there - their products were very competitive in terms of performance, and price. In some cases the Intel product was the quicker on the benchmark, but then when it came to pricing, it really wasn't worth the extra money over the AMD product.

Looking at what nvidia are charging here, I suspect the AMD may well be angling to play the exact same game. If the flagship nvidia card is 900, and something that is trading blows with it costs 600 (say), then I know exactly which one I'd be buying.
 
blueacid said:
I think maybe 4 years ago, the same could well have been said about the CPU market. Yet here we are with the tables having turned, and mindshare starting to move across.
AMD played a brilliant move there - their products were very competitive in terms of performance, and price. In some cases the Intel product was the quicker on the benchmark, but then when it came to pricing, it really wasn't worth the extra money over the AMD product.

Looking at what nvidia are charging here, I suspect the AMD may well be angling to play the exact same game. If the flagship nvidia card is 900, and something that is trading blows with it costs 600 (say), then I know exactly which one I'd be buying.
Click to expand...

hopefully amd can add in missing features

* proper drivers
* nvenc
* dlss
 
Boomstick777 said:
5700 XT for example is a hell of a card, at a great price.

I almost wish AMD would leave the DGPU market and focus just on CPU and APU. Because even if AMD beat Nvidia on all metric I still believe people will buy Nvidia, the mind-share and marketing is so strong. For now it seems like a fight no one can win, or would even want to try.
Click to expand...

First off, pricing on 5700XT is nothing great. It just more of AMD following Nvidias pricing trends. Great pricing would be the 5700XT at £250 to £350, beating Nvidias robbery pricing of the 2070 and 2060.

On the other hand if AMD left the GPU market Nvidia would be unchallenged and could do whatever they wanted. The whole reason we are in this mess is because AMD haven't been competing on price to performance at mid and high tiers.

If AMD continue to follow Nvidias pricing, what's the point, they might as well have not bothered.
 
mahius said:
First off, pricing on 5700XT is nothing great. It just more of AMD following Nvidias pricing trends. Great pricing would be the 5700XT at £250 to £350, beating Nvidias robbery pricing of the 2070 and 2060.

On the other hand if AMD left the GPU market Nvidia would be unchallenged and could do whatever they wanted. The whole reason we are in this mess is because AMD haven't been competing on price to performance at mid and high tiers.

If AMD continue to follow Nvidias pricing, what's the point, they might as well have not bothered.
Click to expand...

Pricing on 5700 XT is excellent, competes with RTX 2070 Super but is much much cheaper.

Maybe your expecting to much ?
 
Good AIB 5700XT cards can be had for ~£350-£360, not sure why that is a bad price. Right now the 5700XT is the price/perf king and when someone asks me to recommend a GPU it is the first name on my list.
 
LePhuronn said:
Big Navi being 15% faster than a 2080 Ti is pathetic if true. 40 RDNA 1 CUs is only 30% ish slower than a 2080 Ti, double the number of RDNA 2 CUs is barely 50% faster?

I know AMD's GPUs often underperform, but I sincerely doubt this is true.
Click to expand...

Rumour it was a bit back, that it was only 15% faster, and that they' wern't happy with it, but thats all changed now (which again, is rumoured).
 
Boomstick777 said:
Pricing on 5700 XT is excellent, competes with RTX 2070 Super but is much much cheaper.

Maybe your expecting to much ?
Click to expand...

I'm talking over the long term. I.e. 1000 series pricing wasn't great and 2000 series pricing took the mick.

Last time I bought a brand new GPU, the 970s were going for that £250+ and the 290x was competing at a similar price.

The past 2 generations, Nvidia have just increased prices of their tiers. 980s were had for around 500 quid and now look at the 2080 at a few hundred quid more.
 
I think we've been conditioned by AMD's prior lack of competitiveness and nVidia's capitalisation of their position. the 5700XT die is tiny, 251mm2 (barely bigger than an rx570 @ 232mm2), and I'm sure yields are very good so it must be cheap to produce. But, it's just not priced like that because AMD have no need to. Yes, it's a good price when compared with a 2070 in terms of outright performance when you ignore ray tracing and whatnot - the 5700xt is great at what it does - but then the die is a quarter of the size so.. yeah. It's still the best performance we've ever had at £350 of course, so I'm not knocking that at all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom