** The AMD Navi Thread **

[melmac]

I think Navi is gonna rock with Borderlands 3 too, which is the only other game this year I'm looking forward to

was hyped for borderlands 3, but after reading more about it, it seems like it's just more of the same. I might get it further down the line, but, I won't be getting it at launch. It's Borderlands 2 with updated graphics. I hope I am wrong.

 

[Participant]

I could probably research this myself, but I don't get why people are talking about the 5700XT outperforming the VII yet also saying it will trade blows with the 2070. Can both be true?

Such a shame some of these GPUs are so expensive, but then I guess £250 GPU in a £500 system still gets you console-beating performance.

 

[LeMson]

Who cares about 2070, it's gonna go against the 2070 super

 

[Besty]

I could probably research this myself, but I don't get why people are talking about the 5700XT outperforming the VII yet also saying it will trade blows with the 2070. Can both be true?

S.

for some reason, the VII performance tanked in specific games, 1080p total war: warhammer 2 for example.

it will be the one game where we see what is what.

 

[FoxEye]

I could probably research this myself, but I don't get why people are talking about the 5700XT outperforming the VII

It won't. It will slightly edge the Vega 64. If it beat VII then AMD would have shown that in their slides.

Instead they compared to GTX 2070 and Vega 56.

 

[Raelgun]

It won't. It will slightly edge the Vega 64. If it beat VII then AMD would have shown that in their slides.

Instead they compared to GTX 2070 and Vega 56.

I don't think people understand why games suit one vendor over another, its not raw compute, its what the chips process.

AMD from their slides did not show off a geometry heavy game, non of those games or barely any of them were even tessellation heavy.

We will see each card pull ahead of each other depending on the game.

 

[KompuKare]

It actually hurts my head people think 5700/XT is same price do to being same size as 480/580.
-Designing 7nm die is three times more expensive than 14/12nm. Not the same, not twice but 3 times more expensive.

Yes costs are going up and staying high (for now*), but surely basic logic says that the design costs are a fixed cost, so it makes sense make up for that with volume.

Also, doesn't x3 design costs includes the common work? That is, whatever these Navi share with any as yet unannounced Navi parts and next gen consoles. So it's not just the masks and validation which are expensive, but the whole design. Again, a reason to try to sell as much volume of each chip as possible.

So it makes little sense for AMD disappointing all their potential customers with these disappointing prices.Even if they are limited by wafers and would rather use them for Zen2, mindshare is important.

And looking at how little perf/watt they gained from 7nm, it's pretty likely that when Nvidia get to 7nm Navi will be well beaten in perf/watt and AMD will then have no choice but to cut prices hard, or sell very little. Which is again not a good way to spread the very high fixed-costs of masks etc.

* at some stage around 5nm or 3nm, progress is likely to get even slower or stagnate. Then it makes sense to design only for volume. Something like AMD's chiplet design makes the most sense then. And with no new nodes, the same design might get used for 5 years or more, so economies of scale would be the big factor.

 

[FoxEye]

Who cares about 2070, it's gonna go against the 2070 super

Well, the 2070 Super is going to be £600. So....

The £450 XT is more appropriately compared to the 2060 Super (at £430). Or the regular 2070 albeit EOL.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Yes costs are going up and staying high (for now*), but surely basic logic says that the design costs are a fixed cost, so it makes sense make up for that with volume.

Also, doesn't x3 design costs includes the common work? That is, whatever these Navi share with any as yet unannounced Navi parts and next gen consoles. So it's not just the masks and validation which are expensive, but the whole design. Again, a reason to try to sell as much volume of each chip as possible.

So it makes little sense for AMD disappointing all their potential customers with these disappointing prices.Even if they are limited by wafers and would rather use them for Zen2, mindshare is important.

And looking at how little perf/watt they gained from 7nm, it's pretty likely that when Nvidia get to 7nm Navi will be well beaten in perf/watt and AMD will then have no choice but to cut prices hard, or sell very little. Which is again not a good way to spread the very high fixed-costs of masks etc.

* at some stage around 5nm or 3nm, progress is likely to get even slower or stagnate. Then it makes sense to design only for volume. Something like AMD's chiplet design makes the most sense then. And with no new nodes, the same design might get used for 5 years or more, so economies of scale would be the big factor.

Agreed!

 

[LeMson]

Well, the 2070 Super is going to be £600. So....

The £450 XT is more appropriately compared to the 2060 Super (at £430). Or the regular 2070 albeit EOL.

Ooops i meant the 2060 super, the unlocked core might make it quite oc'able, and the masses will buy nvidia so...

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Ooops i meant the 2060 super, the unlocked core might make it quite oc'able, and the masses will buy nvidia so...

The RX5700 is 10% faster than a bog standard RTX2060,so the RTX2060 Super is probably going to be similar speed.

 

[Curlyriff]

was hyped for borderlands 3, but after reading more about it, it seems like it's just more of the same. I might get it further down the line, but, I won't be getting it at launch. It's Borderlands 2 with updated graphics. I hope I am wrong.

If it is that then that is exactly what I am wanting and expected tbh. It was great as BL2, no reason to change up massively what worked, it has a new story, new loot, new weapons, new ammo types, new vault hunters, new/multiple planets, new loot system for multiplayer. What was you wanting it to do?

 

[FoxEye]

The RX5700 is 10% faster than a bog standard RTX2060,so the RTX2060 Super is probably going to be similar speed.

If the 2060 Super is 10% faster than the 2060 for £100 more...! Probably exactly right, tho.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

If the 2060 Super is 10% faster than the 2060 for £100 more...! Probably exactly right, tho.

Its a billy bargain the reviewers will say as it's cheaper than a.........Titan RTX. Value champion OFC!!

 

[Besty]

It won't. It will slightly edge the Vega 64. If it beat VII then AMD would have shown that in their slides.

Instead they compared to GTX 2070 and Vega 56.

I have run some theoretical benchmark numbers again on my spreadsheet.

The problem with the Radeon VII is very visible, it does not work with lower resolution DX11 CPU limited situations very well.

The Vega64 had less problems with this than what the VII has, I don't know why.

For this reason I think that Navi might surprise at 1080p and 1440p. If it stays with the 2070 EOL card then the 5700XT may actually be faster in DX11 1080p than the VII in some games - if it can boost high enough.

Total War is not mentioned on the leaked 5700XT bench slide however, the known numbers are only a 16% delta between a Vega64 and a 2070.

I think therefore that the 2070S will simply re-instate the 15-16% gap between it and the 5700XT.

The puzzle is that this then makes the 5700XT as quick as a Radeon VII in CPU limited situations. In non-CPU limited situations, the numbers AMD have stated in 1440p makes the 5700XT quicker than the VII in Battlefield by a couple of percentage points and the 2070S wont be able to catch it in this particular game, in higher resolutions (the 5700XT).

Again, looking at the bargain basement 5700 (non-XT) the performance numbers imply that the card is a direct performance replacement for the GTX1080. However, the GTX1080FE drew up to 330Watts and the 5700 is 180Watts.

This implies that AMD have created a GTX1080 replacement with a 58% power draw drop which is significantly cheaper at launch. The GTX1080FE at launch was $699 and the 5700 is $379.

I really want to see what the 5700 (non-XT) can do and how much my spreadsheet is off.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

The GTX1080FE is a 180W TDP card and will run off a 400W PSU. The Corsair One models with a Core i7 7700K used an SF400 400W PSU. My SF450 450W PSU has been running a GTX1080FE fine - total system power at the wall with a Ryzen 5 2600 is under 290W when gaming for my system.

 

[TheRealDeal]

I have run some theoretical benchmark numbers again on my spreadsheet.

The problem with the Radeon VII is very visible, it does not work with lower resolution DX11 CPU limited situations very well.

The Vega64 had less problems with this than what the VII has, I don't know why.

For this reason I think that Navi might surprise at 1080p and 1440p. If it stays with the 2070 EOL card then the 5700XT may actually be faster in DX11 1080p than the VII in some games - if it can boost high enough.

Total War is not mentioned on the leaked 5700XT bench slide however, the known numbers are only a 16% delta between a Vega64 and a 2070.

I think therefore that the 2070S will simply re-instate the 15-16% gap between it and the 5700XT.

The puzzle is that this then makes the 5700XT as quick as a Radeon VII in CPU limited situations. In non-CPU limited situations, the numbers AMD have stated in 1440p makes the 5700XT quicker than the VII in Battlefield by a couple of percentage points and the 2070S wont be able to catch it in this particular game, in higher resolutions (the 5700XT).

Again, looking at the bargain basement 5700 (non-XT) the performance numbers imply that the card is a direct performance replacement for the GTX1080. However, the GTX1080FE drew up to 330Watts and the 5700 is 180Watts.

This implies that AMD have created a GTX1080 replacement with a 58% power draw drop which is significantly cheaper at launch. The GTX1080FE at launch was $699 and the 5700 is $379.

I really want to see what the 5700 (non-XT) can do and how much my spreadsheet is off.

The 5700 if it can overclock may be a decent card. On paper stats the specs are not to far off the xt model but the clocks are way lower. If these clocks can be brought up to 5700xt levels i doubt it will be much slower just like Vega 56 to 64. I still think the pricing is to high on both Models but the super cards might just make these prices look decent if they come in at usual Nvidia rip off RRP.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

The 5700 if it can overclock may be a decent card. On paper stats the specs are not to far off the xt model but the clocks are way lower. If these clocks can be brought up to 5700xt levels i doubt it will be much slower just like Vega 56 to 64. I still think the pricing is to high on both Models but the super cards might just make these prices look decent if they come in at usual Nvidia rip off RRP.

Nvidia SUPER make Navi great again??

 

[TheRealDeal]

Nvidia SUPER make Navi great again??

You never know . In a way these Super cards are more interesting as it all depends on there price/performance if the 5700xt will sell at all. If they look like good value compared to 5700xt then AMD have to bring down there prices.

 

[Besty]

The GTX1080FE is a 180W TDP card and will run off a 400W PSU. The Corsair One models with a Core i7 7700K used an SF400 400W PSU. My SF450 450W PSU has been running a GTX1080FE fine - total system power at the wall with a Ryzen 5 2600 is under 290W when gaming for my system.

I will revisit tomorrow and have a look at it and maybe put together a fps/power graph based on my sheet. I really want to get the GTX1080 numbers vs the 5700 non-Xt nailed and then look again on launch day. I think that’s the battleground. AMD and Nvidia are Fighting against the 1080 used market sales in the MM

re:1080 power pig. My world view is skewed as my 1080ti HoF has three 8 pins and is connected to a dedicated liquid radiator larger and heavier than a 6 year old child.