Caporegime
It sounds like a really interesting architecture, when is the proper reveal?
-
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.
RDNA 3 rumours Q3/4 2022
- Thread starter Grim5
- Start date
- Status
Soldato
I thought he said Navi33 for that (7600XT) after mobile release?
Last edited:
Caporegime
He did.
Suspended
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,179
Damn I misheard then possibly, was sure he said Navi 32.
It begins…
These two will be in control of another AMD hype train once again. They do not have a great track record however. Most their trains crash and burn spectacularly 
I hope humbug can finally steer this one home, but I fear even if the product is a good one the pricing will kill it making that impossible. Hope I am wrong as LtMatt needs a win. The poor lad was left to bang on about Godfall and FC6 for the past two years
I hope humbug can finally steer this one home, but I fear even if the product is a good one the pricing will kill it making that impossible. Hope I am wrong as LtMatt needs a win. The poor lad was left to bang on about Godfall and FC6 for the past two years
Caporegime
Last edited:
Man of Honour
"companies make moves that make the most business sense" is also a simplification, proven by the fact that they very often don't. I think that greed is a more accurate simplification.
While very small companies (small enough to be owned by and pretty much entirely run by 1 person or at most a few people) might have the ongoing success of the business as a primary goal, greed is still a reasonably accurate simplification because there's a direct and very obvious correlation between the business and the owner(s) who control(s) the business directly. The business' money is their money. The business' success/status is their success/status.
Any company larger than that doesn't have the same direct correlation between the business and the people making decisions at the business. The motivation of those people is still the same - their own wealth and status. Greed is still a reasonably accurate simplification. The motivation behind their decisions is themselves, their goal is to be able to portray themselves as being extremely successful because of their own extraordinary abilities. Also to get as rich as possible, but above a certain level of wealth that's primarily a way of keeping score, a measurement of success.
Random example from my own life, one of many:
A part was due to be replaced on a system because of forthcoming changes in regulations. The installed part was compliant with the previous version of the regulations but would not be compliant with the next version, so it would have to be replaced before the new version of the regulations came into effect. The replacement parts to meet the incoming regulations had already been purchased and were already being installed in the various sites owned by the business. Big business, lots of sites, several months to go before the new version of the regulations came into effect so there was no need to have the extra expense of a rush job hiring multiple teams of people to do the job on a couple of hundred sites simultaneously. This particular site was due to have the part replaced with the new version of the part in ~6 weeks.
The old version of the part failed at that particular site. ~6 weeks before it was due to be replaced with the new version of the part. Which the engineer had in their van. Several of them. The part that was going to be installed in that site in ~6 weeks. So the obvious step was to do the job now and save having to do it in ~6 weeks. The parts were guaranteed for at least 10 years and had already been purchased anyway, so installing 6 weeks early would have no effect on warranty period. The new parts were available right there in the van and the slightly early installation would have no effect on the rollout. The alternative course of action was to patch up the old part with a temporary repair and then replace it with the new part ~6 weeks later. Of course this course of action would be more expensive. Two visits from the engineer, both of which the company would have to pay for at a relatively high cost. You know how it goes - company A pays an employee £15 an hour and bills company B £30 per person-hour for labour. Plus the cost of replacement subparts to repair the old part. Plus, of course, the cost of replacing it with the new part a few weeks later.
No-brainer, obviously. Replace the failed old part with the new part. The installation of the new part was already paid for (or at least accounted for), was already arranged and was happening soon anyway. Patching up the existing part for a few weeks was a completely pointless expense that would do nothing other than reduce the company's profit by increasing its costs. Replacement was obviously the decision that made the most business sense. The engineer suggested it. The site manager agreed. Everyone who knew about it agreed, since it was so obvious. But the next level of management up vetoed it and ordered the patching up. They knew it was a bad business decision, of course, since it was so obviously a bad business decision. But it meant that the cost could be assigned to "necessary repair" rather than "replacement" or "upgrade" and that would improve their score on assessment from their superiors (who know nothing about what's happening on the ground, of course), i.e. it was a better decision for them personally. Another factor was the inertia of larger businesses - the policy was to repair whenever possible. Full stop, end of story. Even if the repair was more expensive than a replacement which would also come with a warranty.
I have no doubt anyone with more than a little experience of work could come up with many other such examples. It's not true that "companies make moves that make the most business sense". That's also a simplification and I think that greed is a more accurate simplification.
Last edited:
Soldato
You heard fine
He said Navi32 after 33 - reckons at least 6 months and late spring by one source and summer by another...
Man of Honour
The person making the decision made the best decision for themself. Also one in line with company policy. I wouldn't call that incompetence.
Suspended
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,179
That's a big big statement to make, and might go some way to explain Nvidia's bonkers pricing strategy...
Soldato
Yeah, madness. Although he was the guy that said a few weeks back the Nav33 was launching before the mid-range (after navi31) timestamp start link.
I must have got confused as they use the shotgun approach like the other channels hoping something sticks.
Last edited:
The company policy sounds like something that should have been update long before this occured but hasn't because "reasons". The company policy seems to ineffective it its current iteration and is bleeding money for the company.
The manager couldn't some how figure out to spin it as a saving for the company to his own boss. It appears that maybe he is one of those people that thinks he must always bring good news to his boss? Or is the boss the type that only wants to hear good news.
From your description, the boss sounds like he can only reason in, number in this box is good (necessary repair), number in this box is bad (replacement/upgrade). Without bothering to look at the finer detail.
This is why incompetence is the first word that comes to mind reading the story.
Edit: We should probably route this discussion to the Nvdia/AMD situation to avoid going too far off topic.
Last edited:
Soldato
Last edited:
Navi 33 is supposed to be competing with the 6800XT ish while having 8GB of RAM (based on the video above).
That won't work out well.
Caporegime
No..... GPU horse power is not really the problem, no point in having it if you can't use it, its a bit like restricting a Porsche to 50 MPH.
I'm guessing they'll harvest it down for lower end SKUs.
Hmm? Everyone (who's everyone?) keeps saying companies are... Companies are greedy. Especially publicly traded companies, like AMD and Nvidia. It's the rat race to own everything, be everything. To out-compete everyone. It's ruthless and brutal. All of the money, all of the time! It's why "trickle-down economics" will not ever work. Because it doesn't trickle down, FFS.
They aren't going to do that... And why would they?
Associate
Is there a non paper launch date? I want to buy a 7600xt
- Status