-
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.
Not much excitement for RDNA3, compared to the RTX 4000 series
- Thread starter g67575
- Start date
Looks like scammers to me, no reputable sellers are at those prices.
What are you most excited for?
Second half of 2022 will see a lot of exciting hardware releases. Which one gets you up at night?
www.techpowerup.com
RDNA 3 looks set to become the most exciting PC component to be released this year.
People don't seem bothered much about Intel's 13th gen.
Last edited:
Hopefully AMD will also announce a bunch of games getting fsr 2.1 too as if rdna 3 is a nice upgrade over a 3080/3090 for a good price, obviously ampere owners will lose out on dlss access in a lot of games, suppose could always just inject FSR into them games but then you'll get bad ghosting/trailing.
Last edited:
I think they heavily astroturf
What information are you basing this on? Like the others have said there have been almost no leaks for AMD
So there are a few ways we can estimate.
1) paper spec
N31 paper spec is 48WGPs with 256 shaders each for a total of 12,280 shaders. Clock speeds are rumoured to be >3GHz so we have 2.5x the shaders and around 40% more clockspeed for a total increase in compute of around 3.5x at the low end.
Even though we all know that there is not going to be a 1:1 increase in compute to FPS when you have a 3.5x increase in compute expecting a 2x performance increase is not exactly out of the question.
2) perf/watt.
AMD have said perf per watt is a > than 50% increase. There is also talk of increasing TDP. A 375W N31 with 50% more perf/watt than 6900XT is a 1.875x speedup. With thr way AMD sandbagged Zen4 clockspeed and performance uplift it is possible that >50% perf/watt is closer to 60% perf/watt that equates to a 2x speedup.
So while there are a lot of unknowns getting some kind of ballpark estimate for performance is not impossible and it looks as though raster performance of a 4090 or even faster is on the cards depending on board power and the exact perf/watt increase.
For reference a 4090 is about 1.87x faster than the 6900XT according to the officially released information we have.
My personal opinion is that the top reference N31 will have a 375W TDP, be about 2x the 6900XT in performance and about 7-10% faster than the 4090 in pure raster.
If N31 scales well with power/clocks I can see AIBs pushing 400W+ and getting another 10% or so performance out of it.
It is literally impossible to achieve the performance you get from using FSR/dlss, the hardware advancement simply isn't there, more so for ray tracing. That and having tech like dlss/fsr allows us gamers and developers to push the visuals even further without having to wait years for hardware advancement, not to mention, not having to pay through the teeth for such hardware. If it weren't for dlss/fsr, we would be stuck with just raster/limited visuals for at least another 2-3 years and even then you still would be behind.
That and as long as developers keep doing a **** job with native + TAA, lots of us rather use dlss/fsr 2.1 where possible anyway.
Last edited:
AMD managed to take market and mindshare from Intel quite quickly with the launch of Ryzen but it was because they offered more cores at much lower prices. In the gpu market, AMD seems to be constantly playing catchup since Nvidia always is one step ahead when it comes to features such as DLSS and RT. To truely take market share they will need to offer something that Nvidia does not have and at lower prices.
So far on paper, RDNA3 does not appear to be offering anything new so if Nvidia's DLSS3 really gives upto 3x/4x performance in RT then AMD will struggle to take any market share..
Associate
- Joined
- 19 Sep 2022
- Posts
- 1,010
- Location
- Pyongyang
dlss has this great capability where you could limit frames to a respectable number and save energy while not sacrificing much on the performance front.. this may not be the only but right now the most promising path to hardware efficiency where you could hope abt going back to 2-slot graphic cards with manageable power consumption numbers, it doesnt matter what the larger market thinks because jensen seems to be hellbent on executing his vision.. its strange how people see no benefit
That's because the industry failed to properly reach 4k and in reality we're still on 1080/1440p.
Said the same thing a while back, amd need to start getting ahead and doing things first (especially with having features that people will want/need or/and benefit from across a variety of games or/and areas) rather than playing catchup especially if they are charging in the same bracket as their competition.
If dlss 3 delivers (jury is still out on that.... but it's already confirmed to be in 35-40 [?] games, meanwhile we're still waiting for FSR 2.1 to get into more than 10 games... and FSR 2 is in what 45-50 games now? Obviously it will overtake dlss at some point but the pace/adoption rate needs to be far quicker), how long will it be till amd have a feature on par with that? If we're going to be talking about 1-2 years again then that is a massive disadvantage unless amd price well below nvidia to compensate for that.
Nvidia have literally opened every single door for amd to come in and claim back a massive chunk of market share, if there ever was a perfect opportunity, it is now and I'll be amazed if amd **** that up.
Given the cost of these chips (tsmc) have gone up considerably, I'll be amazed if amd can bring out something costing similar to rdna 2 MSRP though, obviously they don't have the same margins as nvidia so will have wiggle room but I would expect prices to still be eye watering.
TBF, for just raster and without dlss/fsr, I would say most medium/high end gpus are very 4k/60+ capable now especially if you don't have to max every single setting.
My concept is a bit different though:
1) The mass market is under $300 and the cards in that price bracket are able to more or less play 1080p at decent settings
2) Roughly double that and you get the enthusiast tier, where 1440p is fair game
3) Above that, you start getting into serious luxury, the PC gaming equivalent of 1%
4) Pandemic skewed the amounts upwards a bit but that's supposed to be temporary and not "the new normal" as Nvidia's pricing wishes
To give an even rougher yardstick, most gamers will spend the equivalent of 1-2 monthly paychecks for their gaming rigs, GPU included. For UK, the government made this handy excel file, divide by 12 to get what I mean:
Percentile points from 1 to 99 for total income before and after tax
This table shows the percentile points of the income distribution, estimated from the Survey of Personal Incomes each year.
Ahh crap, yeah it is. I had 3rd October in my head. :/
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,179
FFS AMD can you *please* leak some numbers/features to whet our appetites at least!!!
It has been very quiet hasn’t it. Unusual to have virtually no leaks so close to reveal/release.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,179
Yup, same for Nv too but I expect those soon to leak from reviewers. I don't mind if AMD are a bit slower but use a lot less power, that suits me! Would just love to know *something*