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

[BigBANGtheory]

I'd say no, not a the top end. I was sceptical before the Coreteks and MLID rumours. I was uneasy about the hype eg double the CUs, double the performance. It reminds me of the Fury, Vega and Polaris launches.

that is a fair point tbh, track record is a thing and its not been great for a long time. I wont say never but not in recent times.... In fairness to the Radeon Tech group that maybe because they are secondary to the CPU boyz at the CEO and board level if they cant crank out the $$$ then they will see less investment and support including I'm sure foundry usage.

 

[gpuerrilla]

Arden has 52 active CUs. Big Navi up to 80 CUs. Nom Nom

 

[KungFuSpaghetti]

Why do you believe they won't? How much of a performance increase is Ampere over Turing? RDNA 1 is mathematically capable of beating the 2080 Ti, and even if AMD only manage half of what they intend with RDNA 2's performance improvements it'll be trading blows with Ampere. Unless Nvidia are taking competition seriously and actually give Ampere a proper performance uplift.

AMD being able to compete with Nvidia this gen is entirely down to Nvidia. They've already let their hubris cost them 7nm manufacturing, and if they arrogantly dismiss AMD again and don't make Ampere a properly chunky upgrade then AMD could very well get at them. I know TFlops means very little in isolation, but are you honestly suggesting what we've seen in the XSX so far is all that AMD have? How much could AMD wring out of that alone if it was unshackled from a console's power limit? Smash 300W through those 52 CUs and see what happens.

If you're going to take AMD rumours with a pinch of salt then you should also do so with Nvidia. Nvidia rumours suggest 4x the ray tracing performance for Ampere. Nvidia rumours offer wildly different performance numbers. Nvidia rumours suggest they're actually pretty worried about Big Navi.

I think AMD will do it this time, but my sky isn't going to fall if they don't. There's being optimistic and there's being a fanboy. There's also being a realistic and being a hater. Tread these lines carefully, one is a stance for discussion, the other just makes one look like a fool.

Wall of text aside, I think the bottom line is that when it comes to GPU's, nvidia have a history of being able to deliver. AMD, not so much... it's fair to say they still haven't managed to match the 1080ti on a smaller process node, which is partly why I think they will poop the bed again.
Radeon 7 and 5700xt both had high hopes and neither got remotely close (launch prices also sucked). If the new AMD offering manages to match the founders 2080ti I'll be surprised tbh.
I really hope they can bring some competition, but history is generally a good indicator.

 

[rubberduck]

Wall of text aside

The post was not excessively long (unless you have a very slow reading speed) or poorly formatted.

 

[gpuerrilla]

Wall of text aside, I think the bottom line is that when it comes to GPU's, nvidia have a history of being able to deliver. AMD, not so much... it's fair to say they still haven't managed to match the 1080ti on a smaller process node, which is partly why I think they will poop the bed again.
Radeon 7 and 5700xt both had high hopes and neither got remotely close (launch prices also sucked). If the new AMD offering manages to match the founders 2080ti I'll be surprised tbh.
I really hope they can bring some competition, but history is generally a good indicator.

Firstly, I agree with you.

The only tangent I would take on your opinion there is for everyone's sake, a 1080ti is old hat and was the benchmark in 2017 and 2018. Since then they gave RTX so thats a 2080, 2080 super and 2080Ti which are all better as we are led to believe due to the raytracing and improvements. Unfortunately with it comes the rake in prices.

So I am confident that bearing in mind your message which holds true normally, we have evidence physically (not complete benchmarks in software yet) that the console GPU with 52 CUs is around the level of a 2080ti, so the big navi releases with any iteration of CUs above that. e.g. The Fury had 64 CUs (historically for comparison) so if they released a fictitious hypothetical 6700xt with that spec it would have to be punching above the 2080Ti through rough hardware specs alone.

 

[KungFuSpaghetti]

Firstly, I agree with you.

The only tangent I would take on your opinion there is for everyone's sake, a 1080ti is old hat and was the benchmark in 2017 and 2018. Since then they gave RTX so thats a 2080, 2080 super and 2080Ti which are all better as we are led to believe due to the raytracing and improvements. Unfortunately with it comes the rake in prices.

So I am confident that bearing in mind your message which holds true normally, we have evidence physically (not complete benchmarks in software yet) that the console GPU with 52 CUs is around the level of a 2080ti, so the big navi releases with any iteration of CUs above that. e.g. The Fury had 64 CUs (historically for comparison) so if they released a fictitious hypothetical 6700xt with that spec it would have to be punching above the 2080Ti through rough hardware specs alone.

The new console card and PC GPU rumours all sound great on paper... but as the saying goes, paper burns. Each time out AMD GPU division promise a lot and generally fail to deliver.
On the other hand if they turn up and destroy nvidia I'll jump at one. I have zero brand loyalty, I'll just get whatever is fastest this time (unless it is terrible value like the 2080ti) as this 2070s sucks for 3440x1440.

 

[LoadsaMoney]

R.I.P Nvidia

 

[five8five]

....we have evidence physically (not complete benchmarks in software yet) that the console GPU with 52 CUs is around the level of a 2080ti, so the big navi releases with any iteration of CUs above that. e.g. The Fury had 64 CUs (historically for comparison) so if they released a fictitious hypothetical 6700xt with that spec it would have to be punching above the 2080Ti through rough hardware specs alone.

I've seen it compared to the 2070S and 2080. 2080Ti seems too high.

 

[five8five]

that is a fair point tbh, track record is a thing and its not been great for a long time. I wont say never but not in recent times.... In fairness to the Radeon Tech group that maybe because they are secondary to the CPU boyz at the CEO and board level if they cant crank out the $$$ then they will see less investment and support including I'm sure foundry usage.

As they're rightfully rolling in cash from CPUs you'd think the GPU division would get a bigger investment.

 

[five8five]

R.I.P Nvidia

There might be some twists and turns yet

 

[gpuerrilla]

The new console card and PC GPU rumours all sound great on paper... but as the saying goes, paper burns. Each time out AMD GPU division promise a lot and generally fail to deliver.
On the other hand if they turn up and destroy nvidia I'll jump at one. I have zero brand loyalty, I'll just get whatever is fastest this time (unless it is terrible value like the 2080ti) as this 2070s sucks for 3440x1440.

Agreed, I eventually got a PS4 and it was actually good - being a PC man for over 25yrs. This time I want to try get a GPU near launch as buying them halfway through lifecycle is cheaper but you blink then the next refresh is out. Will get either brand but its not going to be anywhere near what the 2080ti commanded.

 

[TNA]

Agreed, I eventually got a PS4 and it was actually good - being a PC man for over 25yrs. This time I want to try get a GPU near launch as buying them halfway through lifecycle is cheaper but you blink then the next refresh is out. Will get either brand but its not going to be anywhere near what the 2080ti commanded.

Yeah. These days I either buy at launch or the out going generations used cards. Buy mid to late life cycle does not make sense for me. As you will have got it a bit cheaper, but 3-9 months later next gen comes out and improves price for performance to a level where you could have got a better deal anyway.

Like the people buying 5700 XT somewhat recently, you telling me that level of performance won’t get much cheaper soon? Or £300-£400 won’t buy you a lot more in the next few months? By waiting a bit and buying newly released cards you enjoy the latest shiny, rather than being stuck with old stuff you only purchased not so long ago.

 

[KungFuSpaghetti]

Agreed, I eventually got a PS4 and it was actually good - being a PC man for over 25yrs. This time I want to try get a GPU near launch as buying them halfway through lifecycle is cheaper but you blink then the next refresh is out. Will get either brand but its not going to be anywhere near what the 2080ti commanded.

Yeah same, if it ends up being another nvidia purchase I've put aside enough for whatever they bring out, but I'm not dropping over a grand unless it's a good 50%+ faster. Same applies for AMD, if prices are big then performance needs to be something special this time.

 

[EsaT]

Wall of text aside, I think the bottom line is that when it comes to GPU's, nvidia have a history of being able to deliver. AMD, not so much... it's fair to say they still haven't managed to match the 1080ti on a smaller process node, which is partly why I think they will poop the bed again.
Radeon 7 and 5700xt both had high hopes and neither got remotely close (launch prices also sucked). If the new AMD offering manages to match the founders 2080ti I'll be surprised tbh.
I really hope they can bring some competition, but history is generally a good indicator.

Also Nvidia's history has fails you conveniently forget:
Geforce FX... Fermi being late and achieving performance advantage only by for the time huge power consumption for single chip...
Drivers burning up cards few times...

Only reason Radeon 7 came out was Nvidia's crazy pricing leaving room for improvised renaming of some expensive computing cards for consumer market.
250 mm2 Navi 10 certainly was never meant to compete for top performance position.
Same probably for architecture, which was likely done on smaller resources as side project.
At the time it was designed AMD was still tight on cash and raytracing architecture also for new consoles must have taken most of RTG's resources.

 

[gpuerrilla]

Yeah. These days I either buy at launch or the out going generations used cards. Buy mid to late life cycle does not make sense for me. As you will have got it a bit cheaper, but 3-9 months later next gen comes out and improves price for performance to a level where you could have got a better deal anyway.

Like the people buying 5700 XT somewhat recently, you telling me that level of performance won’t get much cheaper soon?

Yeah I caught myself on in the past couple of purchases, got a good price but then 6 months or so later and next wave come out. Now im in a tighter spot i.e. got vega56 then out comes the 5700XT. Its not worth the outlay as its not a big enough improvement. I got a 4k monitor though and no problem enjoying games at 1440p but I would like the next card to cope with 4k. Maybe not a 3080Ti level but something slightly stronger than a 2080Ti would be nice.

 

[LoadsaMoney]

Yeah I caught myself on in the past couple of purchases, got a good price but then 6 months or so later and next wave come out. Now im in a tighter spot i.e. got vega56 then out comes the 5700XT. Its not worth the outlay as its not a big enough improvement. I got a 4k monitor though and no problem enjoying games at 1440p but I would like the next card to cope with 4k. Maybe not a 3080Ti level but something slightly stronger than a 2080Ti would be nice.

 

[RBImGuy]

Wall of text aside, I think the bottom line is that when it comes to GPU's, nvidia have a history of being able to deliver. AMD, not so much... it's fair to say they still haven't managed to match the 1080ti on a smaller process node, which is partly why I think they will poop the bed again.
Radeon 7 and 5700xt both had high hopes and neither got remotely close (launch prices also sucked). If the new AMD offering manages to match the founders 2080ti I'll be surprised tbh.
I really hope they can bring some competition, but history is generally a good indicator.

You fail to understand the context.
AMD couldn't compete due to financial concerns on the gpu side as they went all in on cpu Ryzen that is beating Intel now and the epic failure of Raja that got fired due to trying to split the company.
RDNA1 with navi was a test ground.
RDNA2 is the next iteration learned and now they can scale the hardware from the learned navi1 experience.

The issue is people assume a double (maybe more actually) CU count from 5700xt but RDNA2 is new design which allows AMD to scale a higher clock speed with other improvements.
RDNA2 also add ray tracing.
Previously amd had to do one card both for compute and gaming (Vega) and now they have split those into separate developments (Navi) allowing amd to really hammer out the RDNA2 gaming performance.

Its a new context of unprecedented unknown as now you cant draw conclusions of past like you want to do which isn't true anymore.
Intel learned this the hard way they thought they were safe and now 4 years later they lost years of development to AMD.

 

[humbug]

Why do you believe they won't? How much of a performance increase is Ampere over Turing? RDNA 1 is mathematically capable of beating the 2080 Ti, and even if AMD only manage half of what they intend with RDNA 2's performance improvements it'll be trading blows with Ampere. Unless Nvidia are taking competition seriously and actually give Ampere a proper performance uplift.

AMD being able to compete with Nvidia this gen is entirely down to Nvidia. They've already let their hubris cost them 7nm manufacturing, and if they arrogantly dismiss AMD again and don't make Ampere a properly chunky upgrade then AMD could very well get at them. I know TFlops means very little in isolation, but are you honestly suggesting what we've seen in the XSX so far is all that AMD have? How much could AMD wring out of that alone if it was unshackled from a console's power limit? Smash 300W through those 52 CUs and see what happens.

If you're going to take AMD rumours with a pinch of salt then you should also do so with Nvidia. Nvidia rumours suggest 4x the ray tracing performance for Ampere. Nvidia rumours offer wildly different performance numbers. Nvidia rumours suggest they're actually pretty worried about Big Navi.

I think AMD will do it this time, but my sky isn't going to fall if they don't. There's being optimistic and there's being a fanboy. There's also being a realistic and being a hater. Tread these lines carefully, one is a stance for discussion, the other just makes one look like a fool.

Ya, The 5700XT is faster than people give it credit for.

Vs a 2080 Super.

BFV: 49 - 59 (+20%)
Detroit Become Human: 56 - 60 (+7%)
Call of Duty: Warzone: 61 - 66 (+8%)
Forza Horizon 4: 80 - 93 (+16%)
Hitman 2: 57 - 67 (+17%)
Red Dead Redemption 2: 33 - 39 (+18%)
Metro Exodus: 49 - 61 (+25%)
Assassin's Creed Odyssey: 38 - 46 (+20%)
PUBG: 47 - 65 (+38%)

The outlier in PUBG, which is Unreal Engine.

Average: +18%, the 5700XT is a 2560 Shader, 1950Mhz, 251mm2 GPU, the 2080 Supper has 3072 Shaders, that's 20% more.

I would suggest RDNA1 has already caught up with Nvidia, it just needs to be bigger.

 

[LePhuronn]

nvidia have a history of being able to deliver. AMD, not so much...

What, Fury and Vega? 2 products from a near bankrupt AMD that were forced to push a compute-oriented arch into gaming because they could not afford to do otherwise? When else have AMD failed to deliver? How did Polaris not deliver at the market segment it was intended at? Nvidia having a history of delivering? Forgetting Fermi and Kepler, are we?

Both companies have hits and misses, yet it seems perceptions are massively skewed because AMD haven't quite come out of their slump yet. RDNA 1 was supposed to be bigger than it was, and had the rumoured board power issues not surfaced, who knows what 56 and 64 CU models could have done.

We'll all see what's what when both companies launch, but opinions on AMD's offering is really moving past healthy skepticism now into something much more fanboiish.

 

[shankly1985]

Ya, The 5700XT is faster than people give it credit for.

Vs a 2080 Super.

BFV: 49 - 59 (+20%)
Detroit Become Human: 56 - 60 (+7%)
Call of Duty: Warzone: 61 - 66 (+8%)
Forza Horizon 4: 80 - 93 (+16%)
Hitman 2: 57 - 67 (+17%)
Red Dead Redemption 2: 33 - 39 (+18%)
Metro Exodus: 49 - 61 (+25%)
Assassin's Creed Odyssey: 38 - 46 (+20%)
PUBG: 47 - 65 (+38%)

The outlier in PUBG, which is Unreal Engine.

Average: +18%, the 5700XT is a 2560 Shader, 1950Mhz, 251mm2 GPU, the 2080 Supper has 3072 Shaders, that's 20% more.

I would suggest RDNA1 has already caught up with Nvidia, it just needs to be bigger.

People just can not accept it. They fast to label AMD's faults but ignore everything nvidia has done wrong.
AMD's issues last years, nvidia last weeks.