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

[KiNgPiN83]

That's believable.

That's depressing. Unless there is going to be a 3090/3100

 

[MissChief]

Some of you seem to forget how tech companies behave. Nvidia could have easily released the Super series as the launch cards. But they didn't. They drip fed us upgrades that are slightly better than before while holding back the maximum potential so they can either release that as 'next gen' or so that they can respond when a competitor comes onto the scene as they did with the Super series. Other tech companies do the same to encourage upgrades and to sell what is essentially the same product more than once. AMD have done refreshes multiple times, renamed cards and tweaked some settings to try and drive more sales. While we may not fall for it no doubt some out there have gone 2060-2060 Super or not seen the 2060 to 2070 as a big enough upgrade but have gone 2060-2070 Super. I highly doubt we'll get to see the maximum potential of 'Big Navi' as we never saw the maximum potential of Nvidia's 20x0 series to begin with.

 

[Chuk_Chuk]

So AMD is going from 7nm to 7nm+ and gaining 50% IPC and yet NVidia is going from 12nm to 7nm+ and only getting 15%.
Both are new architectures.

God this forum makes me laugh sometimes.

The majority of AMDs supposed gains will going from RDNA 1 to RDNA 2 (and the removal of the gcn remenants) not from the node shrink.

 

[BigBANGtheory]

The majority of AMDs supposed gains will going from RDNA 1 to RDNA 2 (and the removal of the gcn remenants) not from the node shrink.

And bigger die sizes current Navi is a midget

 

[EastCoastHandle]

Some of you seem to forget how tech companies behave. Nvidia could have easily released the Super series as the launch cards. But they didn't. They drip fed us upgrades that are slightly better than before while holding back the maximum potential so they can either release that as 'next gen' or so that they can respond when a competitor comes onto the scene as they did with the Super series. Other tech companies do the same to encourage upgrades and to sell what is essentially the same product more than once. AMD have done refreshes multiple times, renamed cards and tweaked some settings to try and drive more sales. While we may not fall for it no doubt some out there have gone 2060-2060 Super or not seen the 2060 to 2070 as a big enough upgrade but have gone 2060-2070 Super. I highly doubt we'll get to see the maximum potential of 'Big Navi' as we never saw the maximum potential of Nvidia's 20x0 series to begin with.

I thought this was common knowledge...oh well.

 

[Kaapstad]

Some of you seem to forget how tech companies behave. Nvidia could have easily released the Super series as the launch cards. But they didn't. They drip fed us upgrades that are slightly better than before while holding back the maximum potential so they can either release that as 'next gen' or so that they can respond when a competitor comes onto the scene as they did with the Super series. Other tech companies do the same to encourage upgrades and to sell what is essentially the same product more than once. AMD have done refreshes multiple times, renamed cards and tweaked some settings to try and drive more sales. While we may not fall for it no doubt some out there have gone 2060-2060 Super or not seen the 2060 to 2070 as a big enough upgrade but have gone 2060-2070 Super. I highly doubt we'll get to see the maximum potential of 'Big Navi' as we never saw the maximum potential of Nvidia's 20x0 series to begin with.

I suspect NVidia had quite poor yields when Turing launched and the non Super cards were a way of using chips that would otherwise be rejected.

If NVidia had used full fat Super chips from launch day the asking price for the cards would have been even more excessive and availability would have been very low.

 

[random_matt]

At most the next navi will be 10% faster than a 2080TI, buildzoid has been through this, worth a watch.

 

[D.P.]

Catch in meaning complete? I think they can do that perfectly fine. Take navi 5700XT only thing letting that down vs its competitors GPU is lack of ray tracing.

Beat well that is a whole different story. AMD doesn't really need to beat nvidia in performance they just need to be competitive give the features and price it well enough.

Amd is already winning in terms of market being in console to mobile laptop deals and even got a massive deal now with Samsung for upcoming phones with navi GPUs

At this rate amd is going to be everywhere.

if you ignore reality and ignore the process node advantage, then sure you can believe in whatever you want

 

[BigBANGtheory]

If NVidia had used full fat Super chips from launch day the asking price for the cards would have been even more excessive and availability would have been very low.

not if they reduced their margins, these things aren’t fixed they are a commercial decision

 

[Kaapstad]

not if they reduced their margins, these things aren’t fixed they are a commercial decision

I suspect NVidia's margins are the same for nearly every family of cards they produce and will be the same for Ampere. Turing use very large chips hence the excessive price.

As to using full fat chips on launch day it would have made availability very scarce whatever price NVidia decided to charge due to yield problems.

 

[shankly1985]

if you ignore reality and ignore the process node advantage, then sure you can believe in whatever you want

Read again what I saying instead of jumping in midway and looking silly.

 

[BigBANGtheory]

I suspect NVidia's margins are the same for nearly every family of cards they produce and will be the same for Ampere. Turing use very large chips hence the excessive price.

I don't believe that for a second not at the product level atleast. If you are talking about some net profit per silicon wafer after the chips are sold on possibly but I doubt it not unless the yields were heavily impacted. TSMC wafers cost what $1000 - $2000 each and yield lots of chips even the big ones the point being even accounting for less chips per wafer it still doesn't cost that much to manufacture them. Where I concede there maybe an issue is the supply volumes because f foundries as we know can only spit out so many wafers per month and are in competition with other tech companies for that capacity. However they could have ordered more and would have done so imho had there not been a surplus of Pascal chips probably sitting in a warehouse somewhere which could have been sold off leading to cheaper EoL Pascal GPUs and more Turing volumes which would have sold better at lower price points, we know this because of relative popularity of 2070S and weaker sales of Turing products prior to that.

TLDR Nvidia took the right commercial decisions for them but in doing so caused consumers ripoff prices (based on historical products) and used Turing alpha features as the justification, I've not seen or read a single thing that would suggest otherwise why even defend it?

 

[TNA]

I don't believe that for a second not at the product level atleast. If you are talking about some net profit per silicon wafer after the chips are sold on possibly but I doubt it not unless the yields were heavily impacted. TSMC wafers cost what $1000 - $2000 each and yield lots of chips even the big ones the point being even accounting for less chips per wafer it still doesn't cost that much to manufacture them. Where I concede there maybe an issue is the supply volumes because f foundries as we know can only spit out so many wafers per month and are in competition with other tech companies for that capacity. However they could have ordered more and would have done so imho had there not been a surplus of Pascal chips probably sitting in a warehouse somewhere which could have been sold off leading to cheaper EoL Pascal GPUs and more Turing volumes which would have sold better at lower price points, we know this because of relative popularity of 2070S and weaker sales of Turing products prior to that.

TLDR Nvidia took the right commercial decisions for them but in doing so caused consumers ripoff prices (based on historical products) and used Turing alpha features as the justification, I've not seen or read a single thing that would suggest otherwise why even defend it?

Could be our good old Kaapstad wants prices to go up even more so when he does make the next RTX Titan X thread he is the only one in it

 

[BigBANGtheory]

Could be our good old Kaapstad wants prices to go up even more so when he does make the next RTX Titan X thread he is the only one in it

why would you want to pay more that's messed up unless you're somehow involved in the supply chain or a major shareholder

 

[Wrinkly]

Could be our good old Kaapstad wants prices to go up even more so when he does make the next RTX Titan X thread he is the only one in it

No way. Kaap knows the more you buy the more you save. Even if you can't SLI them

 

[bru]

Could be our good old Kaapstad wants prices to go up even more so when he does make the next RTX Titan X thread he is the only one in it

why would you want to pay more that's messed up unless you're somehow involved in the supply chain or a major shareholder

Because of humour.

 

[varkanoid]

Some of you seem to forget how tech companies behave. Nvidia could have easily released the Super series as the launch cards. But they didn't. They drip fed us upgrades that are slightly better than before while holding back the maximum potential so they can either release that as 'next gen' or so that they can respond when a competitor comes onto the scene as they did with the Super series. Other tech companies do the same to encourage upgrades and to sell what is essentially the same product more than once. AMD have done refreshes multiple times, renamed cards and tweaked some settings to try and drive more sales. While we may not fall for it no doubt some out there have gone 2060-2060 Super or not seen the 2060 to 2070 as a big enough upgrade but have gone 2060-2070 Super. I highly doubt we'll get to see the maximum potential of 'Big Navi' as we never saw the maximum potential of Nvidia's 20x0 series to begin with.

I think the "Super" was the latest in a long line of Nvidia rebadges. They just found a new way to do another rebadge sneakily with the minimum of tweaks.

why would you want to pay more that's messed up unless you're somehow involved in the supply chain or a major shareholder

Looks like you've been hiding under a rock since 2007 and dont know the legend that is Kaapstad with regards to GPU purchases.

 

[TNA]

No way. Kaap knows the more you buy the more you save. Even if you can't SLI them

Because of humour.

 

[BigBANGtheory]

Looks like you've been hiding under a rock since 2007 and dont know the legend that is Kaapstad with regards to GPU purchases.

but at the same time I'm sure is not a bad person and recognises that they are not the typical consumer of GPUs unlike the millions of PC gamers out there many of whom are wondering if they will have a job in the next 6months

 

[pete910]

You missing the point! Flagship or not its not even in the same price bracket how can you even compare? I thought my post was clear enough to understand what I was getting at.
We can not even compare last-gen consoles for one they using old hardware and tech sure they had AMD GPUs but that is that. The new consoles will be using incase the Xbox same Windows, same DX12 Ultimate and same CPUs and GPU like found in the PC space, it has never been this close before they are basically mini PCs! You build for these you build for all the market.

AMDs vision has been this point for years they have wanted to bring everything together Next-Gen consoles will be doing just that.

I think we're both not seeing each others points, It's why I don't get involved much in here as I find it hard to relay my meaning! I ought to by a thesaurus maybe.