Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,017
The size of GB203 is disappointing, but tbf if they can make it almost as fast as a 4090 in most scenarios then that'll be fair enough
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.
The size of GB203 is disappointing, but tbf if they can make it almost as fast as a 4090 in most scenarios then that'll be fair enough
yeah they need something for china, so i think this will be it -gb203 matching or faster than 4090 in raster but gimped tensor cores as a workaround for US chip embargoThe size of GB203 is disappointing, but tbf if they can make it almost as fast as a 4090 in most scenarios then that'll be fair enough
The size of GB203 is disappointing, but tbf if they can make it almost as fast as a 4090 in most scenarios then that'll be fair enough
more importantly.. its going to be the return of 'IS 12/16GB ENOUGH' threads?Honestly... 12GB again
I'll take it
more importantly.. its going to be the return of 'IS 12/16GB ENOUGH' threads?
mods gonna get busy again
you cant blame nvidia for low memory, theres obviously enough muppets out there buying 8/12gb 4000 cards for nvidia to make a killing profit wise, so why change for 5000 series
Why would that even be a question when 8GB is plenty until the PS6 gen.more importantly.. its going to be the return of 'IS 12/16GB ENOUGH' threads?
mods gonna get busy again
Essentially AMD need to be careful they don't fall too far behind and that sony/microsoft won't ever be enticed by nvidias offerings.....
Please, I'm sure there are some company reps who read forums. Don't need them getting this ridiculous idea in their head. Some of us want the next cards to actually have vram, and not be given the scraps.Why would that even be a question when 8GB is plenty until the PS6 gen.
/AMD says HiSome of us want the next cards to actually have vram, and not be given the scraps.
They're busy calculating how small they can make the memory bus width, before the thing ceases to function. Then they'll get a card out./AMD says Hi
Which just so happens to be *just* after Nvidia so they can follow on pricingThen they'll get a card out.
Maybe the original plan was to release a 4080ti for $1200 on the 102 and drop the 4080 to 1k once they had sold off the backlog of ampere but when AI kicked off and the 4090 shot up to 2k they shelved those plans.Bonkers how cut down the AD102 has had to be to hit that level - over half the die disabled from the full theoretical 18432 core part.
Model Die CUDA
CoresMemory Bus
(bits)Bandwidth
(GB/s)VRAM
(GB)TDP
(W)Price Desktop 4060 AD107 3072 128 272 8 115 $299 Desktop 4060Ti AD106 4352 128 288 8/16 160 $399/$499 Theoretical AD106 Max AD106 4608 128 Desktop 4070 AD104 5888 192 504 12 200 $599 Desktop 4070 Super AD104 7168 192 504 12 220 $599 Desktop 4070 Ti AD104 7680 192 504 12 285 $799 Theoretical AD104 Max AD104 7680 192 Desktop 4070 Ti Super AD103 8448 256 672 16 285 $799 Desktop 4080 AD103 9728 256 761.8 16 320 $1199 Desktop 4080 Super AD103 10240 256 736 16 320 $999 Theoretical AD103 Max AD103 10240 256 Desktop 4090D (China Only) AD102 14592 384 1008 24 425 Desktop 4090 AD102 16384 384 1008 24 450 $1599 Theoretical AD102 Max AD102 18432384
4080 Super was the fully enabled AD103, so a Ti would have to have come from the AD102. I guess it just depends whether bits could be disabled in a "balanced" enough way to delivery better than 4080 Performance.
The stumbling block possibly being the 384 bit memory bus - leaving that enabled = 24GB and so is too attractive against the flagship 4090, but if it has to be disabled back to 256 bit, perhaps the other sections end up to weak to be worthwhile?