I agree with Humbug but *if* the 7600M can do 120fps in Division 2 Ultra at 1080p with good thermals then that's good enough for me on a laptop tbh.
Desktop? It will be good enough for most but its gonna come down to price.
Last edited:
-
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.
It looks like the 'real' /affordable RDNA3 + next gen NV desktop launch won't launch until September. Thoughts?
- Thread starter g67575
- Start date
Desktop? It will be good enough for most but its gonna come down to price.
Soldato
How is the hierarchy being decided? Based on what? Does price power consumption or rt performance play any role?
Soldato
Details in the thread https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/gpu-hierarchy.18951645/
Associate
Makes perfect sense I will definitely be recommending 6950xt over a 4070ti to a bunch of relatives i don't want around my house
Tbf it should only sit one above as it’s only 10% faster.
Here we go again. This will be my only post in this thread but I will have my popcorn ready.
Affordable cards...bit of an oxymoron these days.
The date they release is the date they release , not much we can do about that. I would like it sooner because I do not believe Nv or AMD will drop current prices until they have released the rest of the product stack. I think they have deliberatly priced high to create room for the lower end products to be at higher prices. 4070 for £650-700 would not surprise me and with the cut down specs I am not sure it will be faster than a 3080 so would actually be worse value than the older Ampere card. 4060ti for £550 and then 4060 for £450+ when a 128bit card should be no more than £250.
AMD pricing is even wierder and I guess they react to Nv. 7800xt should cost not more than £500 but with the 7900xt being at £900 I can see it coming out at way higher price than that and maybe £650-700. 7700xt may actually be the best product in the stack , is not a chiplet memory design so just an updated RDNA2 really. I am very excited to see the price on the 7700xt and if they get it right it could be a stonking card for the masses.
Affordable cards...bit of an oxymoron these days.
The date they release is the date they release , not much we can do about that. I would like it sooner because I do not believe Nv or AMD will drop current prices until they have released the rest of the product stack. I think they have deliberatly priced high to create room for the lower end products to be at higher prices. 4070 for £650-700 would not surprise me and with the cut down specs I am not sure it will be faster than a 3080 so would actually be worse value than the older Ampere card. 4060ti for £550 and then 4060 for £450+ when a 128bit card should be no more than £250.
AMD pricing is even wierder and I guess they react to Nv. 7800xt should cost not more than £500 but with the 7900xt being at £900 I can see it coming out at way higher price than that and maybe £650-700. 7700xt may actually be the best product in the stack , is not a chiplet memory design so just an updated RDNA2 really. I am very excited to see the price on the 7700xt and if they get it right it could be a stonking card for the masses.
Soldato
Dont think their has been anything officially said to suggest a release date.
Annoying really because people who don't want to spend £1000+ on a GPU don't really have any options. Can't even buy a two year old graphics card at a reasonable price
Just look at N31 and then guess what N32 will look like. It is pretty damn obvious.
Draw a line that cuts the right most 2 MCDs off and there you have 3 SEs with 16CUs each, an oversized command front end + the display engine on the left and a little bit of additional space. That would mean increasing the CU count per SE to 20CUs would fit easily and boom you have N32 in a 200mm^2 package with 4 MCDs which we know means 256bit bus.
That is what will power 7800XT.
A cut version with 3 MCDs (192bit) will be what powers the 7700XT.
Performance I don't really know. I can take a guess at 7700XT because I think it will be 48CUs and the uplift vs 6750XT will be similar or better than that of 7900XTX over 6950XT which would put in in 6800XT territory. 25% more shaders, 33% more bandwidth and IC on the 7800XT and maybe higher clocks due to more power and a better bin would put the 7800XT in 4070Ti territory which is mighty close to the 7900XT but if N32 does not need to draw such stupid amounts of power to hit high clocks like N31 does then maybe that is just what will happen. Analysis suggests that a $700 7800XT would be higher margin than the $900 7900XT or the $1,000 7900XTX so AMD may not mind it being that close in performance given the margin is better, especially since $900 for the 7900XT is overpriced anyway.
Caporegime
Just look at N31 and then guess what N32 will look like. It is pretty damn obvious.
Draw a line that cuts the right most 2 MCDs off and there you have 3 SEs with 16CUs each, an oversized command front end + the display engine on the left and a little bit of additional space. That would mean increasing the CU count per SE to 20CUs would fit easily and boom you have N32 in a 200mm^2 package with 4 MCDs which we know means 256bit bus.
That is what will power 7800XT.
A cut version with 3 MCDs (192bit) will be what powers the 7700XT.
Performance I don't really know. I can take a guess at 7700XT because I think it will be 48CUs and the uplift vs 6750XT will be similar or better than that of 7900XTX over 6950XT which would put in in 6800XT territory. 25% more shaders, 33% more bandwidth and IC on the 7800XT and maybe higher clocks due to more power and a better bin would put the 7800XT in 4070Ti territory which is mighty close to the 7900XT but if N32 does not need to draw such stupid amounts of power to hit high clocks like N31 does then maybe that is just what will happen. Analysis suggests that a $700 7800XT would be higher margin than the $900 7900XT or the $1,000 7900XTX so AMD may not mind it being that close in performance given the margin is better, especially since $900 for the 7900XT is overpriced anyway.
Like this....
@timorous OK, didn't know what a shader engine was but this helps:
At least we know the total bandwidth is probably a bit higher than Nvidia's AD104 chips.
3 Shader Engines with 20 Compute Units each seems plausible for the top N32 die.
At least we know the total bandwidth is probably a bit higher than Nvidia's AD104 chips.
3 Shader Engines with 20 Compute Units each seems plausible for the top N32 die.
Last edited:
I guess one way of estimating the performance of a Navi32 die with 60 CUs, would be to base it on the performance of the top Navi33 chip (7600M XT, with 32 CUs), which is significantly faster than a desktop RTX 3060 (8GB) according to AMD.
I'm gonna assume that it's actually about the same as the RTX 3060 8GB in performance.
I think what we will get with a 60 CU RDNA3 GPU (nearly 2x the CUs of Navi 33), will be a graphics card that is roughly twice as fast as the RTX 3060 8GB, so about the level of a RX 6900 XT:
www.techpowerup.com
In a lot of ways, Navi32 seems to double up on the spec of Navi33 (256 bit memory bus vs 128 bit, 64MB infinity cache, vs 32MB).
My impression is that the 'game clock' is limited to around 2300 Mhz on RDNA 3 (Navi 33 is 2300 Mhz, Navi 31 is 2300 Mhz also), so not sure if we will see much improvement there - Might need high end cooling to go higher?
7600m XT spec:
The RX 7600m XT is supposed to be released already, so maybe we'll see some real performance figures soon.
I'm gonna assume that it's actually about the same as the RTX 3060 8GB in performance.
I think what we will get with a 60 CU RDNA3 GPU (nearly 2x the CUs of Navi 33), will be a graphics card that is roughly twice as fast as the RTX 3060 8GB, so about the level of a RX 6900 XT:
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 8 GB Specs
NVIDIA GA106, 1777 MHz, 3584 Cores, 112 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 8192 MB GDDR6, 1875 MHz, 128 bit
In a lot of ways, Navi32 seems to double up on the spec of Navi33 (256 bit memory bus vs 128 bit, 64MB infinity cache, vs 32MB).
My impression is that the 'game clock' is limited to around 2300 Mhz on RDNA 3 (Navi 33 is 2300 Mhz, Navi 31 is 2300 Mhz also), so not sure if we will see much improvement there - Might need high end cooling to go higher?
7600m XT spec:
The RX 7600m XT is supposed to be released already, so maybe we'll see some real performance figures soon.
Last edited:
I'm thinking about buying an RX6800 soon, it's roughly 2x as fast as the card I've got at 1440p and costs ~£490 new.
I will wait a little more, to see if the RTX 4070 is going to come out, I'm beginning to wonder if Nvidia has delayed their launch deliberately.
I will wait a little more, to see if the RTX 4070 is going to come out, I'm beginning to wonder if Nvidia has delayed their launch deliberately.
Last edited:
It's a good card. Mine barely drops below 100fps in warzone 2.0 with graphics maxed at 1440p, I have it capped at 120 as see no reason to go higher.
Last edited:
Caporegime
£490 is quite reasonable for that, it looks like a decent card to me, all the RDNA2 cards are, they just lack in RT but who really cares about that on a midrange GPU?
Last edited:
Ive got a rx 6800 sapphire nitro running games on a 4k monitor some settings terned down no problem
I'd buy a RX 6800, but it can't quite handle Cyberpunk at 1440p, at 60 FPS:
It looks like it can handle Warhammer III though:
I'm leaning towards either a RX 6800 XT or RTX 3080, but both are still outside what I'm willing to pay.
It looks like it can handle Warhammer III though:
I'm leaning towards either a RX 6800 XT or RTX 3080, but both are still outside what I'm willing to pay.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 30,353
Given the DLSS improvements lately I'd be leaning towards the 3080 personally.