Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 8,481
If the 6800XT isn't 16GB, and matching a 6900/50XT - then WOW.
-
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
You say all that, but the performance numbers suggest otherwise.
The only thing that might be a disadvantage for AMD, is the lack of a large L2 cache (instead there's infinity cache).
Some people insist that Navi32 has a 192bit memory interface for some reason, it's very likely to be wrong.
The other thing that looks wrong about the speed is the GDDR6 memory speed, it's likely to be the same as the high end RDNA3 GPUs.
Last edited:
Caporegime
The 7900XT has 40% more Shaders and assuming a 256Bit bus on the 7800XT a 25% wider bus, yet its only 27% faster than the 6800XT.
Maths don't lie....
Do we have official specs or is it the rumor mill?
I think you must be ignoring the FP32 processing power, which is 38.40 TFlops. This is likely to be very accurate, because we know the max number of Compute Units on Navi32 (60), and a clock rate of 2500Mhz, which be quite a modest estimate.
What AMD have done with RDNA3, appears to be similar to what Nvidia did with Ampere, in terms of floating point performance.
This increased floating point performance has been seen on the RDNA3 mobile chips (announced recently).
What AMD have done with RDNA3, appears to be similar to what Nvidia did with Ampere, in terms of floating point performance.
This increased floating point performance has been seen on the RDNA3 mobile chips (announced recently).
Last edited:
Caporegime
We are going off the TPU specs, we all are, if that isn't right, if its a different GPU...... then its a different GPU.
Caporegime
what are those specs?
I'd like to hope what we're seeing is the 7700xt, if even AMD starts going backwards on price/performance we'll seriously have to start hoping Moore threads or other chinese players are willing to give a serious shot.
Here you go:
They are for Navi32, not 7800XT specifically.
The article came out months before the release of the Navi31 chips, and it was accurate.
Seems to have been correct in predicting the Compute Units, memory bus and infinity cache of Navi33 chips also:
They are for Navi32, not 7800XT specifically.
The article came out months before the release of the Navi31 chips, and it was accurate.
Seems to have been correct in predicting the Compute Units, memory bus and infinity cache of Navi33 chips also:
Last edited:
Caporegime
Here you go:
They are for Navi32, not 7800XT specifically.
The article came out months before the release of the Navi31 chips, and it was accurate.
Thanks.
256Bit Bus, yes i think TPU probably got that wrong.
7680 ALUs <that is Dual Execute Shaders, even AMD don't list it as that, they list it as shader units rather than their execution capabilities. half of 7680 is 3840, which is what TPU also listed, along with the 200mm Logic die.
Yeah that's what I was thinking, I cant believe they would do this. I may end up skipping this Gen altogether although still fancy a 7900XT further down the line but might just wait. RX6800 still performs brilliantly.
Is there any chance in you opinion that 7800XT will somehow be on N31?Thanks.
256Bit Bus, yes i think TPU probably got that wrong.
7680 ALUs <that is Dual Execute Shaders, even AMD don't list it as that, they list it as shader units rather than their execution capabilities. half of 7680 is 3840, which is what TPU also listed, along with the 200mm Logic die.
Caporegime
Navi 31 is a 300mm die, they aren't going to let 100mm of silicon go to waste.
Having said that they may have to, or do something, i don't necessarily think AMD are doomed, they know the problem better than we do, if there is a problem they will do something about it, because they can't not.
Associate
you may have a 7900 non-XT on N31 to compete with 4070
below that i would be betting on nvidia
below that i would be betting on nvidia
Last edited:
Unless it will be the 6800 of this generation, a very rarely seen chip that fills a price/performance niche in name and uses the bottom bins.
It's only dire if they try and charge 800 sheets for one. The actual chip and architecture itself is still pretty sweet.
Last edited:
Well, since the plain 6800 also had the best perf/watt I think that would possibly their best card this gen. As we saw last gen when things like the 6700 XT got clocked a good bit past the perf/watt sweetspot (AKA once the mining boom was in swing everything which was release was clocked to the max and pre-skalped (also witness the 3080 vs the 3080 Ti)).
The real question to AMD is: after spending $millions developing RDNA3 and with not console players to subsidies the R&D what volume do AMD want with RNDA2?
Ultra-low volume but high margins? Well with Nvidia on near 90% marketshare that is a very risky move. Or far lower margins but much higher volume?
Their "we are premium brand" nonsense strategy really hasn't worked well and this year the recession is real, the cost of living crisis is almost global and miscalculations like insisting Zen4 must be a clean break only available on expensive DDR5-only and mostly PCIe 5.0 AM5 platforms has really eroded their ability to grow in the consumer space. And while Zen4 should be great in laptops (well compared to anything which relies on Intel's huge P cores), they are late to that market. That leaves servers. Well, Intel's designs are terrible there but server buyers are conservative and I'm sure Intel can carve out some niches for E-core only server chips.
A company willing to grow would snap up all wafers they can with the quite easy calculation: any margins we make is going to be far better than the console margins even if it won't please Wall Street.
Well, the RDNA2 based RX 6600 XT was slower (on average) than the RTX 3060, according to Techspot:
EDIT - Oops, it depends on the resolution actually, which is faster.
Spec wise, it's basically identical to the RDNA3 based RX 7600M XT:
www.techpowerup.com
www.techpowerup.com
And this is what AMD claims about the 7600M XT's performance:
More games compared here:
Seems like it's around 20% faster than a RTX 3060 8GB, depending on the game.
So, I'd assume at least a 20% performance increase for RDNA3 Compute Units. The floating point (FP32) processing power is approx. double.
That's before taking clock speeds into account.
The Boost clock on the RX 6800 is just 2100 Mhz, so 2500-2600Mhz for Navi32 wouldn't be a surprise.
EDIT - Oops, it depends on the resolution actually, which is faster.
Spec wise, it's basically identical to the RDNA3 based RX 7600M XT:
AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT Specs
AMD Navi 23, 2589 MHz, 2048 Cores, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 8192 MB GDDR6, 2000 MHz, 128 bit
AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT Specs
AMD Navi 33, 2469 MHz, 2048 Cores, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 8192 MB GDDR6, 2250 MHz, 128 bit
And this is what AMD claims about the 7600M XT's performance:
More games compared here:
Seems like it's around 20% faster than a RTX 3060 8GB, depending on the game.
So, I'd assume at least a 20% performance increase for RDNA3 Compute Units. The floating point (FP32) processing power is approx. double.
That's before taking clock speeds into account.
The Boost clock on the RX 6800 is just 2100 Mhz, so 2500-2600Mhz for Navi32 wouldn't be a surprise.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 8,481
Yep, thinking the same, my 6700XT is still great. Looks like a gen skip or EOL "bargain" buy.